get_stablecoin_premium

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description adds critical behavioral traits: payment method (x402 micropayment), supported chains, client SDKs, and a link to documentation. It also explains the economic interpretation of the output.

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 informative but includes some extraneous details (e.g., emoji, price/micropayment specifics) that could be streamlined. However, it is well-structured with bullet points and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description completely explains the tool's purpose, interpretation of results, payment requirements, and references. No gaps remain.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description naturally adds no parameter info. Baseline of 4 applies as no additional semantic value is needed beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states 'Get USDT and USDC premium on Korean exchanges vs official USD/KRW rate' and distinguishes itself from Kimchi Premium, making the purpose clear and differentiated from siblings like get_kimchi_premium.

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?

It explains the indicator's meaning (positive/negative premium indicating capital flow) and separates it from Kimchi Premium, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools.

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