exchangeAssets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the output. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or any other behavioral traits.

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 single-sentence description is concise, but it borders on under-specification. While it avoids fluff, it sacrifices necessary detail. It earns a baseline score for being direct.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is far from complete. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to understand parameter usage or tool selection.

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 input schema has two parameters ('id' and 'slug') with zero description coverage, and the tool description provides no explanation of how these parameters identify an exchange or their relationship. The agent cannot infer correct usage.

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 returns 'assets/token holdings of an exchange', establishing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'exchangeInfo' or 'exchangeMap', so it's not a 5.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any conditions or prerequisites mentioned. The agent has no context for selecting this over other exchange-related tools.

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