get_historical_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention whether data is cached, any limits on 'days' parameter, or output format beyond 'closing prices'. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Description is one concise sentence, front-loaded with purpose. No fluff, but could be longer for completeness.

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 an output schema exists, return values are covered. However, no guidance on parameter ranges or timezone for days, and no usage context for how this relates to chart generation. Incomplete for a tool with zero annotations.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description should compensate. It adds no detail about 'ticker' or 'days' beyond their names. Baseline is 3 due to absence of param info in description.

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 closing prices for chart generation, specifying the action (fetch), resource (historical prices), and purpose (chart generation). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_stock_price_chart or get_stock_analysis.

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 siblings. It does not mention prerequisites, alternatives, or contexts where this tool is preferred.

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