get_candles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions public access and timeframe options, but lacks details on rate limits, data range, pagination, or caching. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds critical context (public access, timeframe details). Efficient and well-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?

The tool has 3 simple parameters and no output schema. The description explains the core function and key parameter options, but omits response structure (e.g., array of candles) and ordering. Adequate for simplicity but missing some context.

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 context for the 'timeframe' parameter (e.g., default value of 1m), but adds nothing beyond schema for 'market_id' or 'limit'.

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 'Get OHLCV candles for one market,' specifying the verb and resource. It also clarifies it's public and lists timeframe options, making the purpose distinct from sibling tools like get_ticker or get_orderbook.

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 implies usage by stating 'Public — no credentials needed,' but provides no explicit when-to-use or alternatives. It doesn't differentiate from similar data tools such as get_stats_history or get_ticker.

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