get_tickers_jpy

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral info: cache 10 seconds and 24h change rate. However, it lacks disclosure on read-only nature, authentication needs, or other traits. The cache note is helpful but not exhaustive.

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?

Highly concise: one sentence in Japanese covering purpose, key features, and cache behavior. No extraneous words, front-loaded with the action.

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 parameterless tool, the description covers the basic purpose and a behavioral note (cache). However, it does not explain the return format or data structure, which would be helpful given no output schema. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Input schema has no parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. It simply states the tool takes no parameters.

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 (取得/get), resource (全JPYペアのティッカー/all JPY pair tickers), and additional details (24h変動率付き/with 24h change rate). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_ticker (singular) by specifying 'all' and 'JPY pairs'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. The description implies usage for fetching tickers of all JPY pairs but does not mention alternatives or exclusions. Usage is implied but not clarified.

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