migrate_v1_to_v2

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It explains that the tool returns a dictionary containing Markdown and guidance to the V2 spec page, and clarifies the optional parameter behavior. It does not cover auth or rate limits, but for a guide tool this is acceptable.

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 well-structured with an introductory sentence, usage context, Args, and Returns sections. It is front-loaded with the purpose and does not contain redundant information, though it is slightly verbose.

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?

The description provides sufficient information for an agent to invoke the tool correctly: purpose, parameter semantics, and return format. It does not mention error handling, but given the simple nature of the tool, the provided details are adequate.

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 zero description coverage for v1_endpoint, but the description compensates fully by defining it as an endpoint path or keyword, providing concrete examples ('/v1/prices/daily_quotes'), and stating the default behavior when omitted. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 provides a migration guide from V1 to V2 API, using the specific verb 'provide' and resource 'migration guide'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on endpoint correspondence and redirecting to V2 specification pages, which is a unique purpose.

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?

The description explicitly defines the target scenario: 'when users using V1 API migrate to V2 API', and explains the behavior when v1_endpoint is omitted. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tool names make the contextual differentiation clear.

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