get_historical_prices

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Explains return format (dict keyed by ISO timestamp), included fields (OHLCV, dividends/splits), and metadata. Also covers parameter interactions and constraints (intraday range limits). Does not mention error handling or authentication, but covers core behavior well.

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?

Concise and well-structured: purpose first, then parameter usage guidelines in bullet-like style, and return format details. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers main usage patterns, constraints, and return structure. Lacks explicit enumeration of return fields but provides enough context for correct invocation. Minor omissions (like error handling) do not significantly impact completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must add meaning. It explains the key parameters: period vs start/end, interval granularity limitations, and actions flag. Does not detail prepost or auto_adjust, but main usage parameters are clarified.

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 'Get historical OHLCV price data for a symbol,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_quote (current price) and others that provide different data types.

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?

Provides clear instructions: use either period or start/end (with precedence), and explains interval limitations for intraday data. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with siblings, but context is sufficient.

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