timeseries_get_range

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, description carries full burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, data volume limits, authentication requirements, or return format. Only mentions schema flexibility, which is already in the input schema enum.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundancy. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 8 parameters, 4 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return format, pagination behavior, error handling, or data constraints, leaving gaps for tool selection and invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context by listing example schemas, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. Parameters are well-documented in the schema, so description offers marginal value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'Get historical market data' with specific verb and resource. It mentions 'flexible schemas' and lists examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools like batch_download and metadata tools. However, it could better differentiate from similar historical data tools like get_historical_bars.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention when to prefer this over batch_download or get_historical_bars, nor provide exclusions or context for selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.