get_rates

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that output is OHLC bars, ordered by recency, and count is clamped. This is good for a read-only tool, but could add that it does not modify data or mention error handling. Overall, behavioral traits are clearly conveyed.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with core purpose in first sentence. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. Highly efficient.

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?

For a simple data retrieval tool with output schema, description covers parameter semantics and basic behavior. It could mention error handling or data availability for invalid symbols, but the current level is adequate. Lacks explicit sibling differentiation, but otherwise complete.

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%, but description fully compensates: it explains symbol is an instrument, timeframe has specific values (M1, etc.), and count is an integer with range [1,5000]. This adds significant meaning beyond schema titles.

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?

Description clearly states it returns OHLC bars for a symbol and timeframe, most recent first. It uses specific verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_quote (single price) and get_history (likely more general history). No ambiguity.

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?

Description provides timeframe options and count clamping, which gives some usage context, but does not explicitly tell when to use this tool over siblings such as get_history or get_quote. No 'use this for X, but Y for Z' guidance.

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