dzengi_get_candles

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the vague 'bounded' qualifier, implying a limited window/limit, but does not explain time-bound semantics, defaults, or ordering. No contradiction with 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?

The sentence is compact, with no filler, and places the core action first. It earns high marks for conciseness even though it sacrifices detail.

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 seven parameters, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, a one-sentence description is not enough for an agent to use optional parameters correctly or understand the return format. The core read intent is clear, but the invocation surface is only partially covered.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It names symbol and interval, matching the required parameters, but leaves type, limit, startTime, endTime, and priceType undocumented.

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 uses the verb 'Read' with the resource 'candlesticks' and constrains scope to one symbol and interval. This separates it from sibling market-data tools like get_ticker and get_order_book, though 'bounded' is somewhat vague.

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?

It states that the tool is for candlestick data for a single symbol and interval, which gives a clear context for when to call it. It offers no explicit distinction from siblings or exclusions, so the agent must infer that other market-data tools should be used for non-candle data.

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