get_carbon_pricesCurrent voluntary carbon credit prices from two independent sources: per-category minimum/median price and available supply across the Carbonmark marketplace catalog, and spot prices per Klima Protocol carbon class. The two are NOT comparable — read the caveats field on each before using either number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond this: it warns that the two price sources are NOT comparable and directs attention to the caveats field, which is important for correct interpretation of results.
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 two sentences with no filler. The main subject and data provenance are front-loaded, and the crucial caveat about non-comparability is placed prominently. Every sentence contributes essential information.
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 no-parameter, read-only tool without an output schema, the description covers the key data categories returned (per-category price/supply and per-class spot prices) and warns about interpretation. It does not spell out exact field names or units, but the caveat pointer and source breakdown provide sufficient operational context.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description appropriately focuses on data semantics and caveats rather than inputs; there are no parameter ambiguities to resolve.
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 names a specific verb-resource pair: getting current voluntary carbon credit prices, and uniquely identifies the two data sources (Carbonmark marketplace and Klima Protocol). It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like get_price_history by specifying 'current' prices and from get_market_summary by focusing on prices rather than summary metrics.
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 gives clear context: use for current voluntary carbon credit prices, and it emphasizes the need to consult caveats before using the numbers. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions, but its 'current' and 'two sources' framing makes appropriate usage inferable.
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.
Each tool has a generally distinct purpose, but get_market_summary includes a current price table that overlaps with get_carbon_prices. The descriptions mitigate this by clarifying that get_market_summary is for orientation while get_carbon_prices provides detailed price data from two non-comparable sources.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_carbon_prices, get_market_summary, get_price_history, get_story, list_sources, and search_news. The naming is predictable and clearly indicates the returned resource.
Six tools is a well-scoped size for a carbon market data and news retrieval server. Each tool covers a distinct need without unnecessary redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers the core read-only workflows: current prices, historical prices, market orientation, news search, story retrieval by id, and source coverage discovery. The workflows connect naturally, e.g., get_market_summary provides tags for search_news, and search_news results can be followed by get_story.