pricing_infoFree — list every paid tool in the 'market-data' bundle with its price, payTo address and network. Call this first if you don't have a wallet ready yet.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating the tool lists paid tool prices and addresses, and that it's free to call. No annotation contradiction exists. Minor deduction for not mentioning pagination or result format, but with no output schema and 0 parameters, the description covers essential behavior well.
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 a single sentence of 23 words, efficiently packed with purpose, output content, and usage guidance. No filler words or redundant phrases. Every part serves a clear function.
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 0-parameter, no-output-schema tool with good annotation coverage, the description is mostly complete. It states what's listed (paid tools, price, payTo, network) and when to use it. Lacks mention of output size limits, but the list of bundled tools is likely manageable. The description's brevity is reasonable for a simple informational 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?
There are 0 parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema is trivially complete. The description adds value by explaining what the output will contain (price, payTo address, network for each paid tool in the bundle), which compensates for the lack of output schema. No parameter-specific info is needed since there are no params.
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 lists paid tools in the 'market-data' bundle with price, payTo address, and network. While the verb 'list' is appropriate and the resource is specific, the tool name 'pricing_info' is generic, and the title 'Pricing — Market & Regulatory Data Feeds' is broad. It distinguishes from siblings (e.g., live-price-oracle) by focusing on bundle pricing, not real-time quotes.
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 explicitly says 'Call this first if you don't have a wallet ready yet', providing a clear when-to-use directive that orients the agent before other wallet-related tools. No explicit when-not-to-use is needed given the tool's introductory purpose, and the sibling list contains many diverse tools that are obviously distinct.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, with over a dozen real-estate scrapers and half a dozen job boards differentiated only by geography. While descriptions are clear, an agent would struggle to pick the correct tool without prior knowledge of the specific site or region, leading to frequent misselection.
Tool names use a mix of lowercase-hyphenated (boss-az, clinical-trials-monitor), underscore (pricing_info), and long descriptive phrases (official-gazette-regulatory-action-router). No consistent verb_noun pattern exists; some start with source domains, others with action nouns. This lack of predictability makes navigation confusing.
36 tools is on the heavy side for a server that could have been more focused. While a 'data hub' can justify many endpoints, the high number of near-identical scrapers (12+ real estate, 6+ job boards) suggests bloat rather than well-scoped functionality. A leaner set with parameterized regional filters would be more appropriate.
The claimed domain 'Market and Regulatory Data Feeds' is poorly served: there are no stock/forex/commodity price feeds, few global regulatory sources (only FDA, SEC, EU tenders), and many tools are for job and property listings which are tangential. The set feels like a random aggregation rather than a coherent surface, with obvious gaps for core market and regulatory data.