fx_monthly

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but discloses no behavioral traits. It does not indicate if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or describes output format (e.g., time series data). The term 'fetch' implies retrieval but lacks specifics on data freshness or constraints.

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 extremely concise with two words, but this brevity leads to under-specification rather than efficient communication. It is front-loaded but lacks necessary detail, making it concise at the expense of clarity.

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 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and a complex context with many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It fails to provide essential details for proper tool invocation, such as parameter meanings, behavioral context, or differentiation from alternatives.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain parameters like 'from_symbol', 'to_symbol', or 'datatype' (e.g., currency codes, data format), leaving all three parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 'Fetch FX monthly' restates the tool name 'fx_monthly' with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the verb 'fetch' and resource 'FX monthly' but lacks detail on what 'FX monthly' entails (e.g., foreign exchange rates, time series data) and how it differs from siblings like 'fx_daily' or 'fx_weekly', leaving purpose vague beyond the name.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention sibling tools (e.g., 'fx_daily', 'fx_weekly', 'exchange_rate') or context for preferring monthly data, offering no usage instructions or exclusions.

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