get_cardano_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully reveals that the price is aggregated and sourced from DEX liquidity pools, but it does not mention side effects (read-only nature), failure modes, unsupported symbols, or whether the price may vary based on pool conditions.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence with no filler. The core action and key qualifiers are front-loaded, and every phrase adds meaning.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description provides the essential context: what price, from where, and the pairing route. It is sufficient for basic selection and invocation, though it could be more complete by describing the expected return value or error behavior in the absence of an output schema.

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 already fully documents the single 'symbol' parameter with example values, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds context about the quote convention (TOKEN/USDT via ADA bridge) but does not add further parameter semantics 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and defines the exact resource: an aggregated price for a Cardano native token sourced from DEX liquidity pools. It also clarifies the quote path ('TOKEN/USDT via ADA bridge'), which distinguishes this tool from generic ticker or exchange price 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?

The description implies this is for Cardano native token prices aggregated from DEX pools, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings like get_ticker or discover_pools. There is no when-to-use guidance or mention of exclusions.

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