get_candles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the read-only nature and OHLCV output shape, but it does not mention default date range behavior, timezone, ordering, pagination, or response format. This is acceptable but has clear gaps.

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 short sentences with no filler; the main purpose is front-loaded and the interval guidance is compact.

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?

Adequate for a simple read tool, since the schema documents all parameters and required fields. However, with no output schema and multiple overlapping sibling tools, the description leaves out defaults for from/till, response shape, and when to prefer this tool over similar history/candles tools.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by mapping interval values to calendar units ('24 for daily, 60 for hourly, 10 or 1 for minutes'), going slightly beyond the schema's generic 'minutes' wording.

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?

States a specific action and object: 'Get OHLCV candlestick data for a security.' This clearly identifies the data type and resource, and the interval sentence clarifies the granularity options. It does not explicitly distinguish it from siblings like get_history or get_historical_candles, so it stops short of a 5.

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 choose this tool over sibling tools such as get_historical_candles or get_history. The 'Use interval=...' sentence is parameter-level advice, not tool-selection guidance, and no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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