BSV Price

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context by naming the proxy and detailing the return structure ({ bsv: { usd, eur, ... }, satsPerUsd }). No contradictions, but it could mention potential latency or external dependency.

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 compact and well-structured, with a clear one-line purpose, a usage hint, and an Args/Returns section. Every sentence adds value and it is front-loaded.

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?

With a simple single-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter, and return format. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the explicit Returns section, making it fully self-contained.

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 input schema already fully describes the 'currencies' parameter with the same default and format. The description's Args section merely repeats this, adding no new semantic information beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 gets the current BSV price in fiat, specifying it uses ORDnet's own CoinGecko proxy. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ordnet_fee_estimate or wallet-related tools.

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 provides a clear usage context: 'Lets an agent convert satoshis to USD/EUR before spending.' However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, so it falls short of a 5.

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