get_crypto_fear_greed_proxy

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

No annotations provided. The description states the tool 'retrieve's a proxy value,' implying read-only behavior, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like data freshness, limitations, or error conditions.

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 reasonably concise, with a clear purpose sentence and parameter documentation. The Args/Returns format adds structure, though it could be slightly shorter.

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?

With no output schema, the description vaguely states returns 'Proxy value or description,' lacking specifics on format or range. It does not cover potential edge cases or error scenarios for the single parameter.

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 description explains that 'tickers' is an optional list and defaults to a default set, adding meaning beyond the schema which only defines the type. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 retrieves a proxy value for the crypto fear and greed index, using specific verbs and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools which focus on financial data, not sentiment indices.

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 implicitly indicates use for retrieving fear/greed data, but no explicit guidance on when to use or alternatives. Given the uniqueness of the tool, it is adequate.

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