get_candles

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Read-only,' which is a behavioral trait, and clarifies it returns the 'most-recent' data for the 'current chart.' However, it does not disclose potential restrictions (e.g., rate limits, behavior if no chart is active) or other side effects beyond the read-only nature.

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 description is two sentences long with no redundant words. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second lists fields. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded.

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 a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return fields and read-only nature. It lacks explanation of 'current chart' context or error conditions, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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% for the single parameter 'limit,' and the schema already provides a detailed description (maximum number, range 1-2000, default 500). The description adds no extra semantics for the parameter but lists the output fields, which is useful though not parameter-specific. Baseline 3 applies.

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 returns the most-recent OHLCV candle bars for the current chart, with a specific verb and resource. It lists the fields (timestamp, open, high, low, close, volume) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools (get_chart_context, get_drawings, get_indicators, get_provider_status) as the only one returning price data.

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 use for retrieving recent OHLCV data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions to avoid using it. No sibling comparisons or prerequisites are given.

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