Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_market_historyA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the output includes min/max/change statistics, but does not specify rate limits, error handling, or data freshness. For a read tool, more detail on safety and potential failures is needed.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is brief and front-loaded with the main purpose. The args section is clearly formatted with defaults and ranges. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Although the tool is simple and has no output schema, the description does not detail the return format (e.g., array of objects, fields). It covers the input parameters well but leaves the output structure underspecified for an AI agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description clearly explains each parameter: symbol (single ticker), days (default 30, range 1-365), vs_currency (default 'usd'). This adds meaning beyond the empty schema descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'Get daily price history for a symbol plus min/max/change statistics,' clearly indicating the verb (Get) and resource (daily price history). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_price (likely current price) and analyze_portfolio.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for retrieving historical price data, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_price or analyze_portfolio. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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

• get_priceA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses max 25 symbols per call and default quote currency, but lacks information on side effects, authorization needs, or return value details. Adequate but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise with two short paragraphs. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, followed by parameter details. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Without an output schema, the description does not specify the return format (e.g., fields like price, change%). It also omits data source or update frequency. For a price tool, more detail on output would improve completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning by explaining symbols as ticker symbols with examples and a limit of 25, and vs_currency as quote currency with default 'usd'. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description explicitly states it gets 'current spot price and 24h change' for ticker symbols, which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_market_history (historical data) and analyze_portfolio (portfolio analysis).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies use when needing current price and 24h change, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings. Usage context is clear but no exclusions.

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

• analyze_portfolioA
  4.7/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses 'informational only', 'No investment recommendations', max 50 positions constraint, and return fields (value, allocation, HHI, warnings). No contradictions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Description is moderately concise and structured: purpose sentence, parameter list, return description, disclaimer. Could combine some lines, but all sentences add value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema and moderate complexity (2 params, one nested), description covers purpose, parameters with constraints, returns, and usage caveats. Sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds significant meaning: explains holdings as 'Mapping of ticker symbol to amount held' with example and max 50 positions; clarifies vs_currency default. These details go beyond the raw schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states 'Value a portfolio and flag concentration risk', a specific verb+resource. Differentiates from sibling tools (get_price, get_market_history, search_knowledge) by focusing on portfolio analysis rather than price retrieval or market history.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Description implies use for portfolio valuation and concentration risk assessment. Does not explicitly state when not to use nor name alternatives, but the purpose is clearly distinct from siblings.

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

• search_knowledgeA
  4.8/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Discloses that tool returns chunks with source and snippet, instructs agent to synthesize answer and cite sources. Specifies query length limit (500 chars) and k range (1-10). No annotations present, so description fully covers behavioral expectations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Concise, front-loaded with purpose, followed by parameter details and usage instruction. Every sentence adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given simple parameter set and no output schema, description adequately covers input, behavior, and output format. No gaps for effective tool use.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Adds critical meaning beyond schema: query is natural language with max length, k is number of chunks with range. Since schema coverage is 0%, description provides all necessary parameter context.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states semantic search over internal knowledge base with specific topics (MiCA, AML/KYC, custody, listing). Distinct from sibling tools which handle price, market history, and portfolio analysis.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Implies usage for knowledge-based questions, and provides guidance on synthesizing answers and citing sources. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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