Get item price history

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the sole source for behavioral traits. It discloses the tool's read-only nature (historical price data) and scoping (days, source). However, it omits details like output format, pagination, or limitations (e.g., max days), leaving some uncertainty for an agent.

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 brief and front-loaded with the essential action. The parenthetical mention of the API endpoint is somewhat extraneous but not overly distracting. It efficiently conveys the core purpose in two sentences.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description fails to explain what the tool returns (e.g., structure of price data). While the tool's purpose is clear, an agent would lack details about the response format. For a simple data retrieval tool, this is a moderate gap.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like 'days', 'source', etc. It merely echoes the purpose of the parameters in a general way.

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 explicitly states 'Get historical price data for a given marketplace source over a number of days,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. The added context about Pricempire v3 and the example use case ('show me price history for X') further clarify the scope and distinguish it from sibling tools like get_item_prices.

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?

It provides a clear usage context: 'Useful for...show me price history for X style questions.' This implicitly guides the agent on when to invoke this tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or specify when not to use it, missing an opportunity for clearer differentiation.

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