get_candles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with that. The description adds valuable context by explaining pagination via 'before' (pass nextBefore from previous response) and the meaning of 'adjusted' price, which are not obvious from annotations alone.

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 opens with a precise one-sentence purpose, then lists parameters in a clean, bullet-like format. Each parameter description is concise and informative without unnecessary fluff, making it easy to scan.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers all parameters and their interactions (such as pagination), providing enough context to invoke the tool correctly. A minor gap is the lack of explicit mention of OHLCV field names, but the output schema likely covers this.

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 0%, so the description carries full responsibility for parameter meaning. It explains all 5 parameters with specific details: interval values ('1m' vs '1d'), count range (1-200, default 30), before semantics (pagination, pass nextBefore), and adjusted flag meaning (default True). This goes well beyond the schema.

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 '종목의 캔들(OHLCV) 차트 데이터를 조회한다' (queries OHLCV chart data for a symbol), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_price (single price) and get_orderbook by specifying candlestick chart data.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only explains the parameters, with no mention of scenarios that call for candle data or exclusions. There is no explicit instruction on selection.

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