us-stock-history

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

Despite no annotations, description discloses key behaviors: requires Unix timestamps, tradingview-compatible resolutions, pricing, and coverage (US stocks). Lacks details on error handling or data limits but sufficient for typical use.

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?

Three sentences conveying all essential info: purpose, resolution/timestamp/pricing, and alternative tools. No fluff, front-loaded.

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?

Complete for a historical data tool: covers output, input, pricing, and related tools. No output schema, but description compensates. Could mention data depth but not critical.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by specifying resolution format (TradingView-compatible), timestamp format (Unix seconds), and defaults (from 90 days ago, to now), going beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states it provides 'Historical OHLCV bars for any US stock, ETF, or index.' Specifies resource and output. Distinguishes from siblings 'us-stock-price' and 'equity-technicals'.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (history) and when to use alternatives (live quotes, technicals). Mentions pricing and no API key required. Provides clear context for agent decision-making.

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