market_klines

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that it returns a 12-element tuple, which is helpful. However, it does not mention rate limits, ordering of results (e.g., ascending by time), or error handling, leaving some behavioral aspects unclear.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant or truncated information.

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 is straightforward, but the description omits details like data ordering (e.g., newest first) and whether pagination is supported. The return type is mentioned but not fully explained. Given no output schema, more detail would help completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters adequately. The description adds minimal new semantics beyond restating the interval count and limit max, which are already in the schema's enum and maximum.

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 fetches historical K-line/candlestick data, using specific verb '获取' and resource 'K线/蜡烛图历史数据'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'market_continuous_klines', which may serve a similar 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 mentions supported intervals (15 types) and limit (max 1500), providing useful constraints. But it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like market_continuous_klines, and no when-not-to-use scenarios.

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