get_prices

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 does well: explains the default output format (text table with header line), the verbose structured alternative, pagination/count-only semantics, and default parameter values. This is a read operation and non-destructive, though no return-value detail is given beyond format.

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?

Well-organized with a concise intro paragraph describing output behavior, then a structured Args section listing each parameter with purpose. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with the essential behavior (default text table, count line, pagination, verbose option).

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?

For an 8-param read tool with an output schema and zero annotations, this is thorough. It explains output formats, pagination, defaults, count-only mode, and every parameter. The output schema exists to document return structure, and the description covers behavioral aspects comprehensively.

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%, so the description must compensate for all 8 params. It documents all of them with purpose and examples (e.g., commodity 'VTSAX', currency 'USD'), making clear which are filters (start_date, end_date, currency), which control pagination (limit, offset), and the verbose flag. Only minor gaps: no explicit format hints for date strings in the schema context, though examples are provided.

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 price history for a commodity' — a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes well from siblings like get_latest_price, create_price, delete_price, and list_commodities by explicitly being about price history retrieval.

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 explains output formats (default compact text table with count line vs verbose structured envelope) and pagination behavior (offset, limit=0 count-only). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over get_latest_price or when-not scenarios, leaving some ambiguity among price-related siblings.

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