get_dolar_quote

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool is informational/read-only ('Solo informa cotizaciones; no es asesoramiento financiero'), but says nothing about data source, freshness/latency, or whether quotes are cached — a material gap for exchange-rate data.

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?

Three short lines: purpose first, then the valid type list, then the disclaimer. No filler, and the most important content is front-loaded.

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?

A single optional parameter and no output schema, so the description needn't document returns in detail — but for a quote tool the agent still lacks any hint about the response shape (rate values, timestamp/currency) and about staleness. Adequate, not complete.

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 there is no enum, so the description's enumeration (mep, ccl, oficial, blue, mayorista, tarjeta, cripto) is the only source of valid values — high added value. It does not explain what the distinctions mean (mep vs ccl vs blue), which an agent unfamiliar with Argentine FX jargon may need.

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 concrete verb and resource: returns the Argentine dollar exchange rate (buy/sell), and enumerates the quote types it covers. Against siblings like simulate_order, get_paper_portfolio and engage_kill_switch, it is unmistakably a market-data lookup rather than a trading or control action.

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 only implied: the tool reports a quote of a given type, with 'mep' as the default. It never says when to reach for it (e.g. before pricing an order in ARS) or what to do if an unsupported type is passed.

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