veroq_crypto_chart

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses return data (price, volume, market cap, period change %), cost (2 credits), and constraints (max 365 days). Could mention authentication needs, but overall strong for a read operation.

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?

Description is well-organized with labeled sections (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE, CONSTRAINTS). Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Perfect length and structure.

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 no output schema, description adequately explains return values. It covers purpose, usage, returns, cost, example, and constraints. With only two simple parameters, this is complete enough for an agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds an example and restates the 365-day constraint, but the schema already includes default and max for days. Marginal added value beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'Get historical price chart data for a crypto token' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling 'veroq_crypto' which is for current snapshot, so agent knows exactly which tool to pick.

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?

Explicitly provides 'WHEN TO USE' section: for crypto price history and charting, and directs to 'veroq_crypto' for current snapshot. This gives clear context and alternative, meeting the highest standard.

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