detect_52w_high_low_range

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds valuable context: cache-only execution with no API call, supported plan availability, data timing, and the 52-week constraint on date_from. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, usage guidance, and an Args block. Minor redundancy exists, such as stating 'All plans' in the first line and then listing supported plans again, and repeating the 52-week constraint in the description and parameter detail.

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 strong annotations and an output schema present, the description covers the essential operational aspects: core behavior, parameter semantics, data availability, and plan support. It omits no critical details for using the tool correctly.

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?

All 6 parameters are described, with date formats, inclusivity, and constraints clearly stated, and detail/code behaviors explained. However, window_sessions and min_prior_sessions defer to another tool ('See detect_52w_high_low') rather than fully self-contained definitions, which is a minor gap given 0% schema coverage.

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 first sentence clearly states the tool scans 52-week high/low breakouts across a date range, which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes itself from the sibling detect_52w_high_low by explicitly referencing it for multi-day queries.

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 explicitly instructs to use this tool instead of repeated detect_52w_high_low calls for multi-day queries and warns against splitting into parallel range calls. It also provides data availability timing (~17:15 JST), giving clear when-to-use context.

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