Get Chart (Historical OHLC)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it fetches historical data and mentions horizon details, but does not disclose other behaviors like default time zone, data format, or rate limits. With annotations covering safety, the description provides marginal extra 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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. Purpose is front-loaded, and additional detail is concise. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite good annotations and 7 parameters, the description omits critical context: no output format (e.g., what fields are in the OHLC bars), no explanation of mode/time, and no note about pagination or limit. The tool remains underspecified for an agent to reliably use.

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 carries full burden. It only explains two of seven parameters: 'Horizon is in minutes' and 'Count defaults to Saxo default (max 1200).' The required parameters uic and assetType, plus mode, time, and fieldGroups, are entirely unexplained, leaving the agent to infer meaning.

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 'Fetch historical OHLC bars for an instrument.' It uses a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('historical OHLC bars'), and distinguishes this tool from the many sibling tools (e.g., get_infoprice, get_instrument_details) by focusing on chart 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 50+ sibling tools including many 'get' functions, explicit context (e.g., 'Use this for charting; use saxo_get_infoprice for single price points') is missing.

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