stablecoin_monthly

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and fully delivers: it discloses aggregation before purge, non-deletion, no authentication, a 60 req/min rate limit, and a 5-minute cache. It also describes the exact monthly row contents, making behavior highly transparent.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by useful operational details. There is minor redundancy in repeating 'permanent monthly archive' early on, but every sentence contributes meaningful information overall.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only archive tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies the row granularity, aggregation logic, included metrics, data permanence, authentication needs, rate limit, and cache behavior. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 and an empty input schema, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The description instead clarifies what each returned month contains, which is helpful given the absence of an output 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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and a clear resource: permanent monthly archive of stablecoin flow data, one row per calendar month. The description distinguishes this from daily or live stablecoin tools by emphasizing monthly aggregation, permanence, and long-term macro liquidity context.

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?

Clear context is provided: this tool is for long-term macro liquidity context via permanent monthly archives, as opposed to presumably daily or transient stablecoin flow data. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended use case is evident.

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