ton_get_rate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core return behavior — current price and 24h change — but omits operational context such as data freshness, source, rate limits, or whether the call is public/read-only.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the resource, scope, and key output field compactly.

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 two-parameter read-only price lookup with no output schema, the description covers the essential input scope and returned fields. It is nearly complete, though it could state data freshness or return formatting more explicitly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the token and currency parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond restating that tokens can be native TON/GRAM or jettons and that currency is fiat, matching the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the resource clearly: current price of GRAM or any jetton in a fiat currency, plus 24h change. It is specific about scope, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as ton_get_jetton_info, so it falls short of the highest bar.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternatives. The function implies its own use case, but the description does not help an agent choose between this and sibling TON tools beyond the obvious difference in returned data.

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