get_supply_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the data is daily and per-chain, which is helpful, but it does not specify the output format, any pagination or limits, or how the supply is aggregated (e.g., combined USDD and sUSDD in one series vs. separate series). This is modest disclosure for a read-only data tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by an alternative tool reference. Every sentence contributes value with no redundant wording.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple no-parameter tool, covering what data it returns, the frequency, and the grouping. However, it could be more complete by mentioning the distinction from the single-supply sibling tools (get_usdd_supply, get_susdd_supply) to clarify whether this is the only historical option.

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 tool accepts no parameters, and the input schema is empty. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics; it names the two assets (USDD and sUSDD) and the per-chain breakdown, which adds context beyond the empty schema.

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 provides a daily time series of USDD and sUSDD supply per chain, using a specific verb ('time series') and resources. It also distinguishes from the sibling get_collateral_history by explicitly directing users there for collateral value history, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance to use get_collateral_history instead when the need is collateral value history, which serves as a clear alternative. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_usdd_supply or get_susdd_supply, which may represent current supply values rather than historical series, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this tool over those.

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