get_asic_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does not state that the call is read-only, whether the data is real-time or cached, what units the efficiency stats use (e.g., J/TH), or what timeframe is covered.

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 short sentence with the resource front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing is wasted, though there is also very little 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 no-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description needs only to convey what comes back, and 'price data and efficiency stats' is a reasonable minimum. It still leaves the shape and scope of 'efficiency stats' undefined, which matters for an agent choosing among the many sibling data tools.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter documentation gap to compensate for, and the schema is empty as expected.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (ASIC miner price data and efficiency stats), which is more informative than the bare tool name. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like get_hashprice or get_market_data that also return price-oriented data, so an agent must infer which one fits.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_hashprice, get_market_data, or calculate_profitability, all of which appear related to miner economics. No preconditions or exclusions are stated.

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