forex_get_previous_close

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the result (previous day's OHLC) but does not disclose the meaning of the 'adjusted' parameter, timezone handling, or any other behavioral nuances. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero fluff. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it omits essential parameter details that would require additional sentences.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context. It names the return type (OHLC) but lacks information about the adjusted parameter, symbol conventions, or how this differs from other forex endpoints. The tool is simple, but the description is too thin to fully support 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. It fails entirely to explain the 'symbol' format or the 'adjusted' boolean's effect. The description mentions 'forex pair' but not how to specify it in the symbol parameter, and 'adjusted' is completely ignored.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'previous day's OHLC', and the scope 'forex pair'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like forex_get_aggregate_bars and stocks_get_previous_close by specifying the asset class and data type.

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 implies a clear use case: retrieving the previous close OHLC for a forex pair. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to know when it applies.

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