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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses payment model (x402, $0.01, 6-day trial), retry header, and that no account is needed. Also clarifies ranking behavior. No destructive behavior implied.

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?

Each sentence adds value: purpose, payment details, cold start advantage, relation to pitch. Front-loaded with main action. Slightly long but not rambling.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, payment, and relationship to sibling tools. No obvious gaps.

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?

Only one parameter (limit) with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no new info beyond the schema's description, which already explains default and max. Hence baseline score of 3.

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 scans FX snapshot for currency pairs at a bottom (strongest buy), ranked most-bottom first. Specifies the universe: 47 pairs (24 vs USD + 23 vs KRW). Differentiates from sibling 'scan_tops' which likely does the opposite.

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?

Provides clear usage context: best cold start tool, no need to pick a symbol, and mentions the free 'pitch' tool as a complementary tool to know how many are at a bottom. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is sufficient.

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