crypto_daily

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention authentication requirements (api_key is optional in schema), rate limits, or the format of returned data (e.g., OHLCV, timestamps). This is insufficient for a data retrieval tool.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it lacks any structural elements (e.g., bullet points, sections) that might aid scanning, though this is acceptable for a simple tool.

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 annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description fails to provide complete context. It does not explain return values, error handling, or how to use the tool effectively, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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%, and the description adds no explanation for the parameters. 'symbol' and 'market' are named but their expected formats, default values, or optionality are not clarified. The api_key parameter is not explained, leaving ambiguity about whether it is required for the API.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('daily crypto price history'), and the source ('Alpha Vantage'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling crypto tools like 'crypto_price' (likely current price) and 'crypto_coin_history' (full history), but could be more explicit about the data frequency.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'crypto_coin_history' or 'stock_daily'. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context for selecting this tool over siblings.

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