get_kr_prices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, indicating safe read-only operation. The description adds value by specifying the exact return fields (KRW prices, volume, change rate). However, it does not disclose potential behavioral traits like data freshness or rate limits, though the annotations reduce the burden.

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 sentences, no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the purpose; the second lists outputs. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool's simplicity, no required parameters, and existence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention default values for symbol and exchange, but the schema covers defaults. A minor gap is not stating that results are for the specified symbol and exchange.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema descriptions are adequate (e.g., 'Crypto symbol to query'). The description repeats 'Korean exchanges' and 'KRW-denominated' but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool gets cryptocurrency prices from specific Korean exchanges (Upbit, Bithumb), and lists the returned fields (KRW prices, volume, change rate). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_kimchi_premium or get_arbitrage_scanner.

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 implies usage for querying Korean exchange prices but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No 'when not to use' or comparison with sibling tools is given, which is a gap given the number of related tools.

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