get_gold_price_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (daily buy/sell prices and day-over-day changes), but does not mention rate limits, timezone, data freshness, or explicitly confirm a read-only side-effect profile. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get'.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences: action, return details, and examples. No redundant or filler content; every sentence contributes to understanding.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately explains return contents (buy/sell prices, day-over-day changes) and provides common codes. It does not cover details like date handling or error scenarios, but given the low complexity (2 simple params), it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by mapping common code examples to human-readable names (e.g., XAUUSD = World Gold, SJL1L10 = SJC 9999), enriching the code parameter semantics beyond the raw schema list.

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 specific action (get historical gold prices), the resource (gold type), and the time scope (over a number of days). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (get_gold_prices, get_gold_price) by emphasizing 'historical' and 'day-over-day changes'.

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 term 'historical' implies use for past data, and sibling names suggest current-price tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. No alternatives are mentioned.

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