GetCurrencies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination, which gives some context about the tool's capabilities, but fails to describe critical behaviors such as whether this is a read-only operation, what the default sorting or pagination behavior is, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or the format of the returned data. The description is too minimal for a tool with 8 parameters.

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 appropriately concise with three sentences that efficiently cover the main actions (retrieve, filter, sort, paginate). It's front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary fluff, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly listing key parameters.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain how to use the parameters effectively, what the return data looks like, or any behavioral constraints. For a list-retrieval tool with filtering and pagination, more detail is needed to guide proper usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 8 parameters are documented in the schema. The description only vaguely references filtering by 'fields such as `code`' and mentions sorting and pagination, but doesn't explain what any parameter actually does, their expected formats, or how they interact. For example, it doesn't clarify what 'fields', 'q', '$and', or '$or' parameters are for, leaving significant gaps.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('list of currencies'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'GetCurrenciesCode', which appears to retrieve a specific currency by code rather than a list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'GetCurrenciesCode' or other list-retrieval tools (e.g., 'GetCollections', 'GetProducts'). It mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination capabilities but doesn't specify when these should be applied or any prerequisites for usage.

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