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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context not captured there: equities delayed ~15 min, crypto real-time, and free crypto access.

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 short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded before the caveats. There is no filler or repetition; each sentence conveys a distinct and useful fact.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description plus annotations cover the key selection and invocation information: accepted asset types, latency behavior, and pricing. The lack of an output schema is acceptable given the simplicity of the price lookup, and no critical information is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents the single symbol parameter with examples. The description reinforces those examples and adds asset-class context, but it does not add substantially deeper semantic or formatting information beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieving the current price for named asset classes (stocks, crypto, gold, indices) with concrete ticker examples. The listed scope also implicitly separates it from sibling tools focused on FX, perpetuals, and portfolio 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?

Gives clear context on when to use the tool: whenever a current spot price for the supported asset classes is needed. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it falls short of being a full routing guide.

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