get_region_history

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get market history,' implying a read operation, but fails to mention pagination, rate limits, data freshness, or the format of returned data. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or constraints.

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 that is concise and to the point. However, it does not front-load the most critical information about what exactly is returned or any constraints. It is well-structured but could benefit from slightly more detail without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description fails to provide enough context for correct usage. It does not explain the response structure, any required prerequisites (e.g., authentication), or how the data is scoped (e.g., time range). This is inadequate for a tool with two parameters and no other documentation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the input schema. It does not clarify how regionId relates to the history or provide any usage hints.

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 retrieves market history for a specific region in EVE Online. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_region_info, market_prices, or region_orders, which are similarly named and could cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as market_prices or region_orders. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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