set_display_currency

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not indicate whether the change is persistent, account-wide, reversible, or how it affects other operations (e.g., price displays). No return value or side effects are mentioned.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the purpose clearly with no redundant words or information. It is appropriately concise for a simple setter tool.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks behavioral context (persistence, side effects) and does not reference related tools like get_supported_currencies to guide the user on currency selection. This leaves gaps for a complete understanding.

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 100%, so the schema already describes the 'currency' parameter. The description adds an extra example (BTC) but no additional semantic details such as whether the code must match a supported list or case sensitivity. Baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Set') with a clear resource ('display currency for the account'). It distinguishes from siblings like set_default_wallet by explicitly naming the target resource, and includes concrete examples (USD, EUR, BTC) that clarify the scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_supported_currencies or set_default_wallet. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., checking supported currencies) or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Set'.

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