stock_historical

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

Given no annotations, the description discloses that it returns OHLCV data with summary stats. It does not detail error handling or rate limits, but the output schema likely covers return structure. Transparent enough for a read-only 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?

Concise with front-loaded purpose, structured Args section, and clear examples. Every sentence adds value, 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 the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and examples adequately. Could mention data source or update latency, but not essential.

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 description provides complete parameter documentation (symbol, period, interval with valid values) and examples, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. Adds significant meaning 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 it retrieves historical price data for any global stock and returns OHLCV data with summary stats. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nse_historical (only Indian) or stock_quote (current price).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nse_historical for Indian stocks, crypto_historical for crypto). The examples show usage but do not specify exclusions or context.

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