list_rates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation (list) but does not disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the requested date lacks a published table. The behavior is simple, but missing details on output or error conditions.

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 consists of two concise, front-loaded sentences with no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose, making it efficient for quick understanding.

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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose and usage context adequately. It could be improved by mentioning the return format or behavior when date is missing, but it remains largely complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 description coverage is 50% (date has a description, table only has enum/default but no description). The description adds context like 'currency rates' and 'on a given date (or latest)', but does not explain the meaning of table types A, B, C. It adds marginal value 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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'all currency rates from an NBP table', and the optional date scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_rate' (single rate) and 'get_rate_history' (historical rates) by focusing on listing multiple rates at once.

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 explicitly states usefulness for 'seeing what's available and comparing multiple currencies at once', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases when to use alternatives like 'get_rate' or 'get_rate_history', which are implied but not stated.

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