Get Token Price

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description adds crucial semantics they cannot: a missing price is data not a failure, unpriced mints are reported separately, and callers must never substitute zero. This directly shapes correct handling of an open-world lookup and is exactly the kind of context the annotations omit.

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?

Front-loads the core capability in the first clause, then the behavioral caveat. Every sentence carries meaning, though the emphatic caps-lock and embedded quote are slightly heavier than needed for the informational payload.

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 single-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers the one thing an agent most needs to get right (the unpriced field and non-failure semantics). Auth/rate-limit context is absent but not critical here.

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 the param load. It explains the 20-mint limit and the per-mint GET semantics, but the 'up to 20 mints' limit is already stated in the schema (maxItems) and it never clarifies the expected base58 mint format. Partial compensation only.

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 verb (get) plus resource (USD token price), with explicit scope (up to 20 mints) and unit (USD). An agent can immediately tell this apart from portfolio/vault/swap siblings, which return different context than a single-mint price lookup.

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 through the 'can this be a basket leg' framing, which hints at when it's relevant, but no alternatives are named (e.g., swap_quote for executable pricing) and no explicit when-not guidance is given. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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