fyers_candles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool returns historical OHLCV candles, but omits critical details like rate limits, authentication requirements, data freshness, error handling, or the return format. This is insufficient for a data retrieval 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 reasonably concise, using a docstring format with a clear block for arguments. The list of interval options is necessary but slightly lengthy. Overall, every sentence adds value without 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?

Despite having an output schema (context signal), the description does not explain the return format or any data structure. It lacks details on date ranges, pagination, or potential limits. For a financial data tool with no annotations, the description is too sparse to be fully actionable.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by specifying that 'symbol' is an NSE symbol with an example (RELIANCE), listing all interval options, and clarifying 'days' as 'Number of days of history'. This adds meaningful semantic value beyond the bare 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 fetches historical OHLCV candles from the Fyers API v3, and lists the interval options and parameters. The name 'fyers_candles' distinguishes it from other candle tools like icici_candles or nse_historical, 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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as icici_candles or stock_historical. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. The user is left to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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