midprice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Fetch midprice' reveals nothing about authentication requirements, rate limits, data freshness, error conditions, or what format the data returns. For a financial data tool with 5 parameters, this complete lack of behavioral context is inadequate and leaves the agent guessing about important operational characteristics.

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 at just two words, with no wasted language. While this represents efficient communication, it's arguably too brief for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations. However, within the dimension of conciseness alone, it scores well for being direct and front-loaded with the core 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?

Given the complexity (5 parameters, 3 required, financial data context), complete lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. 'Fetch midprice' provides no guidance on parameter usage, behavioral characteristics, return format, or differentiation from similar tools. For a tool in this context, the description fails to provide the minimal information needed for effective use.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 5 parameters, the description provides no information about what 'symbol', 'interval', 'month', 'time_period', or 'datatype' mean or how they should be used. 'Fetch midprice' doesn't mention any parameters at all, leaving all parameter semantics completely undocumented. This is particularly problematic given the 3 required parameters that the agent must provide correctly.

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 midprice' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'midprice' with a generic verb. It doesn't specify what resource is being fetched (financial instrument? commodity? market data?), what 'midprice' means in this context, or how it differs from similar tools like 'midpoint' in the sibling list. While it indicates a retrieval action, it lacks the specificity needed for clear differentiation.

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 absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous sibling tools like 'midpoint', 'stock_quote', 'time_series_daily', and various technical indicators, there's no indication of what makes 'midprice' distinct or appropriate for specific scenarios. The agent receives no help in choosing between this and other data-fetching tools.

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