get_history_prices

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the purpose. It does not specify read-only nature, data frequency, error handling for invalid symbols, or limitations on the 'long-range' scope, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 at one sentence, but this brevity sacrifices essential usage and parameter details. While it avoids verbosity, it under-specifies, making it less helpful for an AI agent.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not cover return format, error scenarios, or relationship to similar price tools like 'get_price' or 'get_ohlc', leaving an agent poorly informed.

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%, so the description should explain parameter meanings. It adds value for 'symbol' implicitly but fails to explain 'days' (e.g., optional, range, default behavior). The term 'long-range' hints at temporal scope but does not clarify how the 'days' parameter interacts.

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 'Long-range historical price series for a symbol' clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('get history') and resource ('price series'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_price' (current price) and 'get_ohlc' (candlestick data) by emphasizing 'long-range' historical data.

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 for obtaining extended historical price data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or specific contexts, leaving the agent to infer from the 'long-range' qualifier alone.

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