tv_get_ohlcv

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only' is redundant. It adds useful context about the best-effort widget API with a DOM fallback, indicating possible reliability caveats. However, it does not describe what happens if no chart is active, error behavior, or return format, which would be valuable.

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 only two sentences and front-loads the primary action ('Extract OHLCV bars'). It efficiently conveys the mechanism, fallback, and read-only nature without unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description provides adequate context. It states what it produces, the mechanism, and the read-only safety. The absence of an output schema is not compensated, but the return concept (OHLCV bars) is straightforward. Given the low complexity, the description is nearly complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage for the single parameter maxBars, the schema fully documents it. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, matching the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 extracts OHLCV bars from the active TradingView chart, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like tv_read_chart, but 'OHLCV bars' is a specific output that implies a distinct purpose.

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 implies usage when OHLCV data is needed from the currently active chart, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as tv_read_chart or tv_read_strategy_tester. The mechanism (widget API with DOM fallback) is mentioned, but not the circumstances that would make it the preferred choice.

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