m2m_get_token_price

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive traits. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: median across up to five deepest indexed pools, return contents including contract address, decimals, and pool provenance, and an explicit exclusion of historical series. Minor gaps around error handling for non-allowlisted symbols remain.

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?

Two well-structured sentences: the first front-loads the core operation and result contents, the second adds a key exclusion and sibling contrast. No unnecessary content.

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 read-only tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, return contents, and a key limitation. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit mention of the returned fields.

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% and the schema description already documents allowlisted Base symbols and case-insensitive single-symbol lookups. The description repeats the symbol concept and examples but does not add new parameter semantics 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 names a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('median Base DEX spot price in USD across up to five deepest indexed pools'), and includes concrete token examples. It also distinguishes itself from m2m_get_dex_liquidity, making the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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 explicitly states a major limitation ('Does not return historical price series') and contrasts itself with the sibling m2m_get_dex_liquidity, telling an agent when not to use this tool and which sibling to consider instead.

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