stocks_get_aggregate_bars

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only provides the date format. It omits important behavioral traits such as default timespan/multiplier effects, whether data is adjusted, pagination, or the shape of the returned candles.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds the date format note. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

This tool has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, making the description too sparse for reliable invocation. It lacks explanations of key parameters, defaults, and response characteristics, leaving a knowledgeable agent to infer too much.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies the format for from_date and to_date. Other parameters (multiplier, timespan, adjusted, sort, limit) are left unexplained, leaving significant ambiguity about how to combine them to get the desired bars.

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 action ('get aggregate bars/candles') and the resource ('for a stock'), distinguishing it from similar tools for other asset classes (forex, crypto, options). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the closely related stocks_get_grouped_daily_bars, which also deals with bars.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention the intended use case (e.g., individual stock history vs. grouped market-wide bars) or any conditions/preconditions, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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