C1 Preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavior. It hints at no authentication ('unsigned') and no cost ('free'), but does not disclose whether data is static or dynamic, any limitations, or side effects.

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 very concise (one sentence) with no fluff, but omits useful context such as response format or typical use cases, so it's not maximally informative.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the sample response contains, how it relates to the real endpoint, or any other contextual details needed for proper tool selection.

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 sole parameter 'pair' is fully described in the input schema with examples (BTC-USD, etc.). The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it provides a free unsigned sample response for the C1 crypto/FX price endpoint, distinguishing it from sibling tools like orisha_c1_price which presumably provides signed real data.

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 implies use for testing/demo ('free unsigned sample'), but does not explicitly state when to use this versus orisha_c1_price or other siblings, providing only indirect guidance.

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