Riwayat harga saham

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

Annotations cover read-only and open-world access, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds meaningful behavior: a hard 300-candle cap and the interval/range coupling that triggers it. It also clarifies that totalReturnPct includes dividends while priceReturnPct does not, plus dividends/splits within the range — useful semantics beyond the annotations.

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, zero filler. The core action and return fields are front-loaded, and the constraints (max candles, interval choice) follow immediately after. Nothing repeats the schema or title verbatim.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return values — and it does, naming priceReturnPct, totalReturnPct, dividends/splits, high, low and max drawdown. Combined with the candle cap and interval guidance, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value the schema lacks: the 300-candle ceiling and the rule that 1wk/1mo intervals suit long ranges, effectively explaining how range and interval interact. It does not document the range enum values themselves, which stay in 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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Ambil riwayat harga (OHLC + volume) saham IDX' with an explicit time-range scope, and it enumerates what the response summarizes. The distinction from get_quote (history vs. current quote) is implicit in the wording but no sibling is named outright.

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?

Gives real operating guidance: 'Maksimal 300 candle terakhir; gunakan interval 1wk/1mo untuk rentang panjang' tells the agent how to combine range and interval. It stops short of stating when to prefer this over get_quote or compare_stocks, so no explicit exclusion is offered.

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