get_native_prices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It implies a read-only operation ('Get'), specifies 'current' prices (freshness), and scopes to native tokens, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error behavior, or return format details.

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 description is a single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the core action and resource with no filler. The examples and keying note are compact and directly useful.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and grouping. However, it omits parameter format details and usage context, leaving gaps that a more complete definition would fill.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single optional parameter chainIds. The description's 'keyed by chain' hints that chain IDs affect the response, but it does not explain accepted formats (string or number), whether omitting the parameter returns all chains, or any defaults.

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 ('Get current native token prices') and gives examples (ETH, SOL, SUI, BNB) plus the output organization ('keyed by chain'). It is clear but does not differentiate from sibling price-related tools like get_all_mid_prices or get_mark_price.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternative tools. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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