Pyth Get Price History

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), description adds that data is historical and a warning about not being settlement proof. Consistently reinforces read-only nature.

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?

Extremely concise: three sentences, no wasted words, front-loaded with main purpose and context.

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 presence of output schema and simple data retrieval, the description provides sufficient context: purpose, use cases, and a caveat. No gaps for a read-only historical query tool.

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 description doesn't need to add much. However, description does not elaborate on parameter usage or format beyond what schema provides, leaving baseline at 3.

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?

The description clearly states it gets historical price data from Pyth oracle, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like pyth_getPrice (current price) and pyth_listPriceFeeds (feed listing) by specifying 'historical'.

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?

Provides usage context for pricing, risk checks, and market-aware decisions, plus a warning not to treat as settlement proof. However, lacks explicit comparison with alternative Pyth tools, though historical nature implies distinction.

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