getMarketKline

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds valuable non-obvious behaviors: no authentication required, the exact 7-element array format, reverse chronological ordering, and a 1000-record limit. These details go well beyond the structured annotations and inform agent expectations about response format and limitations.

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 well-structured with headers and bullets, but it contains redundancy: 'Data is returned in reverse chronological order (most recent first)' appears twice, and the 'Agent hint' largely repeats the earlier usage guidance and sibling exclusions. It could be tightened without losing information.

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 tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the critical context: return format, ordering, limit, supported products, authentication, and alternatives. It stops short of fully explaining all parameter units and exact category-to-product mappings, but the enum values in the schema and the supported products list cover most practical needs.

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 does explain that start and end are timestamps in milliseconds and mentions the 1000-record limit, which aligns with the limit parameter. It also maps supported products to the category concept. However, it does not explain interval value units (e.g., '1' meaning 1 minute) or the meaning of turnover, leaving some inference to the agent.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Query historical klines (OHLCV candlestick data)' and lists the data fields included. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by stating 'Do not use this endpoint for mark price candles — use getMarkPriceKline instead' and similarly for index price candles, leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 explicit 'Use this endpoint when you need to' scenarios: building price charts, technical analysis, and retrieving specific time ranges. It also gives clear when-not-to-use guidance with named alternatives for mark, index, and premium index klines, both in the main body and the agent hint.

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