get_token_prices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully reveals that missing prices are omitted rather than causing an error, but it does not mention auth needs, rate limits, or invalid-input handling. The one behavioral detail is valuable but not comprehensive.

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?

Each sentence earns its place: the core operation, the missing-price behavior, and the sibling comparison. There is no filler or redundant explanation.

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 one-parameter tool with fully documented schema, the description is largely sufficient. It explains the output behavior for missing prices and how to choose it over get_token_price. A fuller return-structure note would help since there is no output schema, but the essential invocation context is clear.

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%, so the schema already documents the 'mints' parameter and its limits. The description repeats the 50-mint limit but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: batch retrieval of latest prices for up to 50 mints. It clearly differentiates from the closely related sibling get_token_price by framing this as the batched counterpart.

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?

It gives explicit routing guidance: 'Prefer over many get_token_price calls' tells the agent when to use this tool versus the single-price sibling. This is direct and actionable, with no ambiguity about the intended use case.

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