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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavioral context: the data is normalized to structured English, sourced specifically from Upbit and Bithumb, and requires payment of $0.005 USDC via x402 on Base. It omits return size/pagination behavior despite the 'limit' parameter.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns before the filtering and pricing details. Every clause carries information, though the enumeration of event types is somewhat list-heavy.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the returned event shapes (warning/release, delisting with effective time, suspension/resumption per network). What remains missing is pagination/limit semantics and date formats for 'since', which matters for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It names four of the five filters (ticker, exchange, type, and 'time' for since) but never explains the 'limit' parameter, nor the accepted formats for since or the string type of limit. Partial compensation for a fully undocumented 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 resource (Korean crypto exchange risk events from Upbit/Bithumb) and enumerates the event types returned (warnings, delistings, suspensions, upgrades, listings). This clearly distinguishes it from the adjacent kr_crypto_ticker_status sibling without needing to open either schema.

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 says 'Filter by ticker, exchange, type and time,' which implies how to narrow results, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never names or rules out the obvious alternative kr_crypto_ticker_status. Usage is inferable from the stated filters but left to the agent.

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