xnt_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the source of truth (the on-chain USDCx pool) plus what the reading contains (price, 24h and 1h change). It stops short of stating freshness/refresh cadence or failure behavior if the pool is unreachable.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the payload description comes first and the routing hint second. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned values (USD price, 24h change, 1h change), which is exactly what the agent needs. It leaves unstated the update frequency and behavior on missing pool data, which is a minor gap for a zero-argument lookup.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema to describe and no parameter semantics to add; baseline is 4 under the scoring rules. The description correctly implies no input is needed.

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?

States a specific resource (XNT price in USD) with concrete returned fields (24h and 1h change) and the data source (on-chain USDCx pool). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling token_lookup, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly: 'For any other token use token_lookup.' That gives a clear when-not condition for non-XNT tokens, but there is no guidance on related cases such as historical prices (candles) or other quote assets.

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