get_ohlcv

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior, but it only states what the tool returns. It omits details such as default limit, maximum limit, pagination behavior, handling of the 'since' parameter, or any rate limit constraints.

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?

The description is a single, focused sentence followed by a compact list of timeframes. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose, with no wasted words.

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?

Despite being a simple read tool, the absence of annotations and output schema leaves significant gaps: no return format, no pagination or limit details, no clarification of parameter semantics, and no situational guidance. The description is minimal but not complete enough for unassisted use.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate. It merely repeats the timeframe enum already present in the schema, and provides no explanation of 'symbol' format, 'limit' behavior, or 'since' semantics, so it adds no value beyond the schema.

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 'Get historical candlestick data (OHLCV)' with a specific verb and resource, and enumerates supported timeframes, which distinguishes it from siblings like get_ticker or get_spread.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or comparisons to other data retrieval tools, leaving the usage context entirely unclear.

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