Get Crypto Quotes

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnly, so the description correctly aligns with that. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the schema by explaining that omitted start is computed as now minus the days/hours/minutes lookback. This is a meaningful disclosure of default behavior without contradicting annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence identifies exactly what the tool does, and the second sentence provides the most important default behavior. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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?

For an 8-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and an output schema, the description covers the essential decision-making information: what is retrieved, for which asset class, and how the key time-range default works. The remaining parameter details are already handled by the schema and annotations.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by connecting start, days, hours, and minutes into a single formulaic behavior, which the individual parameter descriptions do not fully express. It does not need to restate each parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Retrieve'), a specific resource ('historical bid/ask quotes'), and a clear domain ('cryptocurrencies'). The word 'historical' distinguishes it from latest-quote siblings like get_crypto_latest_quote, and 'crypto' distinguishes it from stock/option quote tools.

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 gives clear contextual guidance for the relative lookback behavior when start is omitted. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the 'historical' qualifier and sibling names make the intended use inferable without confusion.

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