ramzinex_get_currencies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the operation is read-only (via GET) and requires no authentication. This is basic transparency but does not disclose details like data volume, rate limits, or side effects.

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 short (2 sentences plus Args line) and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Persian line is slightly extraneous for an English AI agent, but overall efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no required params, output schema exists), the description covers the purpose, endpoint, auth, and parameter. It does not describe the return value, but the output schema handles that. Completeness is adequate for the complexity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'instance' parameter as 'Configured instance whose public base URL to use (default when omitted)', adding meaningful context beyond the schema's type and default.

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 'List the currencies supported by Ramzinex', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ramzinex_get_pairs or ramzinex_get_networks by focusing on currencies generally. The inclusion of the API path adds clarity.

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 mentions 'Public, no auth', indicating when to use the tool (no authentication needed). However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or compare to alternatives. Usage context is implied but lacks exclusions.

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