Candlesticks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool gets OHLCV data but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like response format, rate limits, or data source behavior.

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?

Extremely concise and front-loaded. Two sentences: first gives function and defaults, second lists period and trade_sessions options. No wasted words.

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?

Adequate but incomplete. The description provides basics but does not explain response structure, data ordering, or how to interpret results. Lacks details that would be needed given the absence of an output schema and presence of sibling tools.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing defaults and enumerating allowed values for period and trade_sessions, providing a quick reference beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 the tool retrieves candlestick data (OHLCV) and lists default parameter values. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling candlestick tools like history_candlesticks_by_date or history_candlesticks_by_offset.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No context on when to choose candlesticks over other tools that provide price data, such as intraday or history_candlesticks_by_date.

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