pyth_get_price_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the data is in-memory, limited to the current session, and ordered newest last, but it omits behavior around missing history, limit enforcement, and error cases for the required feed parameter.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, scope, target, and ordering efficiently.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the core return concept and ordering. However, the missing explanation of limit and lack of failure-mode context means an agent would still have to infer important invocation details.

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 the description must compensate for both parameters. It adds meaning to the feed parameter by saying 'one symbol or feed id,' but it does not explain the optional limit parameter at all, leaving half the inputs undocumented outside the name and numeric bounds.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it returns price history for one symbol or feed id. The session-scoped, in-memory qualifier and 'newest last' ordering make the scope clear and distinguish it from current-price siblings such as pyth_get_price and pyth_get_prices.

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 phrase 'recorded during this session' clearly signals when this tool is appropriate: historical data accumulated in the current session. It does not explicitly name alternatives like pyth_get_price for snapshots or pyth_stream_prices for live streaming, so it falls short of full when-to-use/when-not guidance.

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