netintel_currency_exchange_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real context: data sources (ECB, Coinbase), 'no API key' auth, and the min/max/average/change stats returned. It stops short of rate limits, error behavior for invalid pairs, or return structure, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: purpose, sources, stats, and auth come before the date-mode guidance, with no filler. The trailing ellipsis suggests it is truncated, but the visible text is efficiently structured.

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 5-param tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description covers provenance, stats, and date modes but omits the currency-pair format and any return-shape detail. Adequate but not complete for the structured-data void it must fill.

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% across 5 params, so the description must compensate. It clarifies start/end/days (with a default of 30) and implies from/to are the currency pair, but it never states the required currency-code format, leaving the two required params under-specified.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Daily historical exchange-rate series for any currency pair') and even names the data provenance (ECB fiat, Coinbase crypto) and computed stats. It is clearly distinguishable from the spot-rate sibling netintel_currency_exchange by the 'history' framing, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by 'historical... series' versus the live-rate siblings, and it explains the date-selection modes ('Pass start/end dates or a days lookback (default 30)'). However there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative, so the agent must infer the boundary with netintel_currency_exchange.

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