get_candles_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: batch retrieval for multiple coins, default end_time to now, mutual exclusivity between days and start/end, and limit semantics (latest N candles). 'Fetch' implies read-only operation, though it doesn't state this explicitly or mention rate limits/auth, but the coverage is substantial.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence followed by an organized Args list. Each line is informative and necessary, with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently conveys all required information.

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 the tool has an output schema, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It adequately covers all input parameters, defaults, and mutual exclusivity constraints, making it complete for a batch OHLCV 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains every parameter: coins as trading pairs, interval as HyperLiquid-supported, start/end timestamps in milliseconds, days as an alternative, and limit as max candles per coin. This fully covers parameter meaning, units, and constraints.

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 fetches candlestick (OHLCV) data for multiple coins in one request, using a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('candlestick data'). This distinguishes it from sibling market data tools like get_orderbook or get_market_data by emphasizing batch retrieval of OHLCV candles.

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 (when OHLCV data is needed) and provides clear context for parameter relationships (e.g., 'start_time required when days not provided', 'days mutually exclusive with start/end'). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when NOT to use this tool, which would earn a 5.

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