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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses a lot: values are 'retained' with source/receipt ages and evaluatedAt, a 120-second freshness policy that is not an execution guarantee, and that conflicts/collector gaps and missing (non-zero) values can appear. These are exactly the behaviors an agent needs to interpret the response correctly.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then the caveats. No filler, though the terminology (evaluatedAt, receipt ages, collector gaps) is terse enough to require careful reading.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully flags what the payload will contain (ages, conflicts, gaps, missing values) and its freshness semantics. It stops short of describing the actual response shape (price vs OHLC fields), which is the main remaining gap.

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% and the single symbol parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the pattern and pointer to list_ondo_assets. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource — 'latest retained Ondo display prices and minute OHLC' — which is concrete and distinct from a generic asset lookup. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_ondo_asset or get_ondo_asset_data, leaving the agent to infer the split.

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?

Usage is implied (fetch current display price/OHLC for a symbol) and the closing sentence carves out scope ('does not open an issuer subscription or supply history'). However, it never states when to prefer this over get_ondo_asset or get_ondo_asset_data, so the agent must guess the routing.

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