forex_get_aggregate_bars

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get aggregate bars' and the symbol format, but does not describe the return format, data granularity, timezone handling, or any side effects. For a read operation, this is a minimal disclosure but lacks useful context.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core operation, but it is not appropriately sized for a tool with 8 parameters and no schema descriptions. It is under-specified, which makes it concise but at the expense of necessary information, so it earns a middle score.

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 8 parameters, lack of output schema, and zero annotation coverage, the description is far too thin to be complete. It does not explain what aggregate bars represent, how to construct date ranges, or what the response looks like. The tool may work for a simple case, but the description is largely inadequate for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate for all 8 parameters. Yet it only clarifies the symbol format for the 'symbol' parameter, leaving from_date, to_date, timespan, multiplier, sort, limit, and adjusted entirely unexplained. This is almost no parameter guidance beyond the raw 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 the operation 'Get aggregate bars' and specifically scopes it to 'a forex pair', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like stocks_get_aggregate_bars and crypto_get_aggregate_bars. The symbol format hint further clarifies the resource type. This is a specific verb+resource+scope statement.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for forex pairs, implying it should be used when forex aggregate bars are needed rather than stocks or crypto. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for selection.

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