获取加密货币历史价格

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 mentions automatic retry, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or discuss rate limits, though it is implied by the nature of retrieving historical data.

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 very concise: two sentences that immediately state the purpose and key features. There is no irrelevant information, and every sentence adds value.

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 that there is no output schema, the description compensates by mentioning the types of data returned (price, volume, technical indicators). However, it could be improved by specifying the exact output format or fields. Overall, it is quite complete for a data retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with detailed descriptions, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter guidance beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves historical K-line data from OKX, including price, volume, and technical indicators. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like binance_ai_report or index_prices, which serve different purposes.

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 does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, it lacks instructions on when not to use it or how it compares to sibling tools such as okx_taker_volume or index_prices.

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