sodax_get_amm_pool_candles

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description confirms the read-only nature ('Get ... data') but adds no further behavioral context such as rate limits or return format behavior. With annotations present, the description adds minimal value beyond confirming the read-only property.

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 a single sentence of 8 words, containing no redundant information. It is maximally concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity. The description does not explain what OHLCV stands for, what the response contains, or any caveats about time ranges. For a financial data tool, agents would benefit from knowing the response includes open, high, low, close, and volume data. The description is too sparse to be fully useful without additional context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with all 6 parameters documented. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema. Per rules, high schema coverage (>=80%) sets a baseline of 3.

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 retrieves OHLCV candlestick chart data for an AMM pool. The verb 'Get' and specific resource 'OHLCV candlestick chart data' make the purpose distinct from sibling tools like sodax_get_volume or sodax_get_amm_positions.

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, nor does it mention prerequisites or context. Among many similar sodax_get_* tools, this lack of differentiation could cause incorrect selection.

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