search_symbols

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions query matching but omits details like case-insensitivity, default exchange (bybit), and limit constraints. The input schema fills some gaps, but the description lacks behavioral disclosure (e.g., pagination behavior, empty result handling).

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage scenario. No redundant information; every sentence earns its place.

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 simple parameters and existence of output schema, the description is nearly complete. However, it could mention the output format briefly or note that results are partial matches (implied by 'substring'). Still sufficient for an adequately documented tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context with examples but does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema. No additional semantics provided for query, exchange, or limit.

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 searches for market symbols matching a query, with examples 'BTC' and 'SOL/USDT'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., get_price, list_exchanges) by focusing on symbol discovery, which is a distinct purpose.

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?

Explicitly says 'Useful when you don't know the exact symbol format an exchange expects.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, but does not cover when not to use or mention alternative tools.

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