get_rate

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It indicates a read operation and lists returned fields, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or side effects. Adequate but minimal.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys purpose, parameter usage, and return value in a compact form. No unnecessary words.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return details are covered externally. The description provides essential context for a simple read operation. Slight deduction for not mentioning any constraints or error conditions.

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 input schema has 0% coverage (no descriptions for parameters). The description adds meaning: char_code is implied as the currency code, and on_date is explained as an optional date with fallback behavior. This compensates well for the schema 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 tool retrieves the official Bank of Russia exchange rate for a single currency on a given date, with fallback to latest date. It specifies returned fields (nominal, value, per-unit rate, effective quote date). Although sibling tools are present, the description is specific enough to distinguish usage.

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 explains when to use the tool (single currency, optional date) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or compare to sibling tools like history_rates or key_rate. Usage is implied but lacks alternatives or exclusion criteria.

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