quote_metrics_at_timestamp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it quotes metrics at a timestamp, but fails to mention return format, error handling, interpolation behavior, or safety profile. This is minimal at best.

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—a single sentence with no wasted words. However, it lacks any structured breakdown of parameters or usage, which might be expected for a tool with seven parameters.

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 seven parameters, zero schema description coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It provides almost no context for the agent to invoke the tool correctly, making it inadequate for real-world 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only adds meaning for the 'timestamp' parameter by clarifying it is in seconds. All other parameters (names, chain, format, decimals, etc.) are left undocumented, leaving the agent to infer their purpose from the schema alone.

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 states a clear verb+resource pair: 'Quote metrics' at a 'specific UNIX timestamp'. It differentiates from sibling tools like quote_metrics_at_block and quote_metrics_at_epoch_end by explicitly mentioning timestamp, but it doesn't elaborate on what 'quote' entails beyond the tool 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 such as quote_metrics_at_block or quote_metrics_at_epoch_end. The description simply states what it does without any contextual cues or exclusions.

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