kzt_rates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'current' rates, but gives no details about data sources, update frequency, response format, or whether the tool has any side effects. This is minimal and leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's runtime behavior.

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, which is concise. However, it sacrifices necessary substance for brevity; it does not explain the tool's functionality beyond the literal meaning of the name, so it is under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to clarify the 'codes' parameter, the expected return value, or how this tool relates to the more general fx_rates, leaving the agent without enough context 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 only parameter 'codes' is entirely undocumented in both the schema and the description. With 0% schema description coverage and no mention in the description, the agent cannot infer what values to pass or what effect the parameter has on the results.

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 identifies the resource: current KZT exchange rates. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool fx_rates by currency specificity, but it lacks an explicit verb like 'gets' or 'returns', making it slightly less directive than ideal.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the more general fx_rates, nor any mention of prerequisites or alternative tools. The description simply states what it provides without contextualizing its use case.

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