get_ticker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only explains the symbol format but does not specify whether the returned price is the last trade, mid-price, or something else, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior. This is a notable gap for a read-only tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the purpose and the main parameter format. It does not describe the response structure in detail, but the phrase 'current price' implies the core return value, and sibling tools add context for related operations.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates effectively by providing concrete examples ('BTC/USDT or BTC/USDT:USDT for perpetual') that clarify the accepted patterns and explain the perpetual variant. This adds meaning beyond the raw regex 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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current price for a trading pair'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings like get_spread and get_multiple_tickers by focusing on the current price of a single pair, with examples for spot and perpetual markets.

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 usage for a single trading pair's price but does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as get_multiple_tickers or get_spread. There is no clear 'when to use vs when not to use' guidance, leaving it somewhat implied.

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