Commodity Historical Rates

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing the fallback mechanism for unavailable dates. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description supplements without contradiction.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides an important behavioral note. Structure is front-loaded and efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (OHLC data) and the presence of good annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers the main behavior and fallback, but does not describe the return structure (e.g., format of OHLC data) or handling of multiple symbols, which could be useful.

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?

The input schema provides clear descriptions for both parameters: symbols includes examples and suggests using commodity_symbols if unsure; date specifies format. The description adds context about date fallback, further enriching semantics. Schema coverage is 100%.

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 the tool gets historical open, high, low, close (OHLC) prices for specific commodities on a specific date, using a distinct verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like commodity_latest_rates (current data) and commodity_time_series (multiple dates).

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?

The description includes a helpful note about automatic fallback to the nearest previous date when data is unavailable, guiding the agent on edge-case behavior. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or provide when-to-use/alternatives guidance.

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