golden_alerts_history

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and delivers richly: it reveals severity thresholds, how data is persisted and refreshed, that days with no data are omitted, and that responses are cached for 5 minutes. This goes well beyond a bare 'history' description.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and keeps mostly relevant detail. It is slightly redundant by stating the default/max twice and includes implementation minutiae like 'ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE', but every sentence does contribute behavioral or usage context.

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 having no output schema and no annotations, the description tells the agent what the response contains, how severity is derived, how freshness/caching works, and how missing-data days are handled. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool and interpret its results.

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?

The schema already documents the single days parameter, so the baseline is 3, but the description actively introduces a conflict: it says max 180 while the input schema sets maximum to 90. This contradiction can mislead an agent into requesting an invalid value, reducing the parameter guidance below the neutral baseline.

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: 'Returns a daily summary of Golden Alerts for the last N days.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like golden_alerts_snapshot and golden_alerts_monthly by framing it as historical daily summaries.

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 clearly establishes when to use the tool: for daily Golden Alerts history over a configurable look-back window. It gives concrete usage guidance via ?days=N, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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