Veroq

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses cost ('2 credits'), return data structure ('timestamp, price, volume, and market cap'), and operational constraints ('Max 365 days'). Lacks only edge-case behaviors (rate limits, invalid symbol handling).

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?

Structured with clear headers (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS, COST, EXAMPLE, CONSTRAINTS). Every sentence serves a distinct purpose; no redundancy. Information is front-loaded with the core action statement.

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?

Comprehensive for a 2-parameter tool: compensates for missing output schema by detailing return values, includes cost transparency, and documents constraints. No gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 has 100% coverage, establishing baseline 3. Description adds value via concrete JSON example and reinforces the 365-day constraint, providing usage context beyond raw schema definitions.

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?

Opens with specific verb ('Get') + resource ('historical price chart data') + scope ('crypto token') and explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'veroq_crypto' for current snapshots vs historical trends.

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?

Contains explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section naming the use case ('crypto price history and charting') and directly contrasts with sibling alternative: 'Use veroq_crypto for current snapshot, this for historical trend.'

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