get_price_history

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only states the core action. It omits details about the response format, data granularity, or whether the returned history includes current data, leaving the agent with limited understanding of the tool's behavior.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and effectively communicates the essential purpose without clutter.

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?

For a simple read tool, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain what the price history output looks like or how the time range maps to data frequency, and with no output schema or annotations, the agent may lack sufficient context to fully understand the returned data.

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 schema provides full coverage for the single 'range' parameter, including an enum and description. The description's phrase 'specified time range' adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's function: retrieving Bitcoin price history for a specified time range. The verb 'Get' and resource 'Bitcoin price history' are specific, and the scope differentiates it from sibling tools like get_realtime_price.

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 usage when historical price data is needed, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_realtime_price or subscribe_price_updates. There is no guidance on exclusions or selection criteria beyond the basic function.

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