Get SOL Price

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the result is 'current' and in USD, implying a real-time fetch. However, it does not mention potential issues like network errors, rate limits, or the exact return format (e.g., number vs. object).

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 sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place, conveying both the purpose and the unit of measurement.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, so the description explains what it returns (price in USD) sufficiently. It does not specify data types or error conditions, but those are likely unnecessary for a trivial price getter. The context is complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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 has zero parameters, so the input schema is fully covered (vacuously). The description adds no parameter information because none is needed. Per the rubric, 0 parameters gets a baseline score of 4.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'current price of SOL in USD'. It is specific and unambiguous, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_wallet_balance and get_recent_transactions by focusing solely on price.

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 clear context: use this tool when you need the current SOL price in USD. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tools are so obviously different (balances, transactions) that no exclusion is necessary.

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