reference_get_exchanges

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states a read-only listing action but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the call requires authentication, whether it returns only active exchanges, whether pagination is involved, or any rate limit considerations. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose with no filler or redundant information.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient for the agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and limitations. The one-line description does not explain the role of the optional parameters, nor does it describe the return value format or any edge cases, making it incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 schema has two optional parameters (locale and asset_class) with zero schema descriptions (0% coverage). The description does not mention these parameters at all, leaving the agent without any guidance on how to filter exchanges by locale or asset class, which is a significant gap.

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 states the action (List) and the resource (all exchanges that Polygon knows about), which distinguishes it from sibling reference tools like reference_get_tickers or reference_get_conditions.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus other reference tools, nor are any alternatives or exclusions mentioned. The description only gives a one-line purpose, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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