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 full burden. It mentions 'supports automatic retry', which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, error behavior, or other important details. The auto-retry info adds some value, but more context is needed.

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: one sentence plus 'supports automatic retry'. It is front-loaded with the main action. While no words are wasted, it could benefit from a more structured format listing typical use cases or output details.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It mentions data includes price, volume, and technical indicators, but not the format or structure. With three simple parameters and no required fields, the description is mostly adequate but lacks explicit output details.

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 has 100% description coverage with default values and constraints, so the schema already explains each parameter well. The description adds that the data 'includes price, trading volume and technical indicators', which provides context beyond parameter definitions but does not add substantial semantic detail.

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 gets OKX cryptocurrency historical K-line data, including price, volume, and technical indicators. The verb '获取' (get) and resource 'OKX加密货币的历史K线数据' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like stock_prices and other OKX tools (okx_loan_ratios, okx_taker_volume) by focusing on crypto K-line 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 usage for OKX crypto data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like stock_prices or altcoins. No when-not or alternative tools are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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