get_hip4_prices

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds context about accepting legacy coin formats and using cursor pagination, which is helpful beyond annotations.

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: first clearly states purpose, second adds essential details on coin formats and output nature. No redundancy, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the rich schema and output schema existence, the description adequately covers the tool's role. It mentions time range and pagination but omits details on interval aggregation defaults; however, these are covered in the schema.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining coin canonical/legacy forms and that output is timestamped snapshots with cursor pagination, enhancing understanding of parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves HIP-4 mid-price (implied probability 0..1) history for a coin, distinguishing it from other HIP-4 tools like order books or trades.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, but the tool name and description imply its use for historical price data. Lacks guidance on when to prefer this over other HIP-4 tools or how to choose between 'get_hip4_prices' versus 'get_hip4_instrument' for current prices.

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