getTokenMultiPrices

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description's 'get prices' aligns with readOnlyHint. No additional behavioral details are provided, which is acceptable since annotations cover the safety profile.

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 (two phrases), front-loaded with the action, and every word adds value: purpose, constraints, required parameters. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the core function and constraints but omits mention of the rationale parameter, which is required and has specific length constraints and privacy guidelines. Given that the output schema exists, return value explanation is not needed, but the missing parameter mention reduces completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description repeats the required nature of network and tokens but adds no new semantic meaning. The rationale parameter is not mentioned in the description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose with a specific verb and resource ('get batched prices for multiple tokens'), and includes important constraints (max 10 tokens, same network) that differentiate it from sibling tools like getTokenDetails (single token details) and getTopTokens (list of top tokens).

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 usage constraints (max 10 tokens, same network, required fields) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over sibling tools or when not to use it (e.g., for more tokens). It only states the required parameters, not context for selection.

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