getTokenHistoricalApr

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

Discloses rate limit (50 req/s IP) and no auth required, which are useful behavioral details. Since annotations are absent, the description provides some transparency but could mention data range or other behavioral traits.

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 very concise: two sentences and a rate limit/auth note. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the action.

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 two parameters with enums and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the parameter meanings or the response format, leaving the agent to guess.

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 does not explain the parameters (coin and range). The enum values (e.g., '1', '2', '3' for range) are cryptic; the agent cannot determine what they represent without additional context.

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 queries historical APR data for a product. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like getEarnAprHistory or getTokenHourlyYield, which could confuse an agent on which to use.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only says what it does and includes rate limit/auth, but no context on appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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