Ticker

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's only added behavioral signal is 'Compact', hinting at response size, plus the field list; it says nothing about rate limits, error behavior for unknown symbols, or staleness of the 24h window.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scope, followed immediately by the returned fields. Every clause carries information; nothing is 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?

With no output schema, enumerating the returned fields is exactly the compensation needed, and it is done. The remaining gap is minor: nothing about invalid-symbol handling or how the 24h window is computed, but for a simple read-only snapshot tool this is close to sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%: the single 'symbol' parameter is documented with a BASE/QUOTE pattern and a BTC/USDT example. The description's 'for one market' merely restates the single-argument scope, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('ticker for one market') and enumerates the payload (last price, bid/ask, 24h change, high, low, volume), which separates it from get_orderbook (depth), get_candles (history) and get_recent_trades (prints). It never names a sibling, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by the content list: an agent can infer this is the quick 24h snapshot call for a single market. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion, and no pointer to alternatives such as get_orderbook for full depth or get_market for static metadata.

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