arbitrage_monthly

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: data never deleted, grows indefinitely, excludes months <5 records, rate limit (60 req/min), cache (1-hr), data source, and authentication requirements.

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 front-loaded with key purpose and details, but it is somewhat verbose with a wall of text. Each sentence earns its place, but could be more concise.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description thoroughly explains return fields, filtering condition, data source, rate limits, and caching, making it complete enough for an agent to 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?

The tool has zero parameters. The empty schema means no parameter info is needed; baseline 4 is appropriate as the description cannot add meaning beyond schema.

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 returns 'permanent monthly archive of cross-exchange arbitrage opportunities' with specific verb 'Returns' and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on historical aggregated data, unlike real-time tools like 'live_stats' or 'recent_whales'.

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 explicit use case ('answer historical questions') and an example question, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or which sibling to use as an alternative.

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