Turkish Lira Exchange Rates (TCMB)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: official daily fixing time (~15:31), weekend/holiday fallback to last trading day, and the JPY-per-100-units quirk. This gives an agent essential context to interpret results, though it doesn't cover error cases for invalid currency codes.

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?

Three sentences deliver purpose, scope, timing, fallback, parameter usage, and a caveat. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds actionable information without padding.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers source, content, timing, edge cases (weekends, JPY units), and usage examples, which fully equips an agent to select and call it correctly. No output schema exists, but the description gives enough about return values (buy/sell rates, currency list).

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?

The schema already documents the currency parameter at 100% coverage. The description adds valuable context: omitting the parameter returns the full table, and it clarifies the ISO 4217 format with examples. The JPY unit note also helps interpret the returned 'unit' field, going beyond schema details.

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 tool retrieves official Turkish lira (TRY) exchange rates from TCMB, specifying the resource (Central Bank of the Republic of Türkiye) and concrete outputs (forex and banknote buy/sell rates for ~22 currencies). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_gold_prices or get_fuel_prices.

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 explicit use cases ('dollar to lira rate', 'EUR/TRY today', converting amounts) and explains the optional currency parameter with clear behavior (single vs full table). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use, but the TRY-only focus makes the appropriate context unambiguous.

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