create_currency

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'store a new currency' and does not explain behavior on duplicate codes/names, whether the operation is idempotent, or what the response looks like. The absence of an output schema further limits the agent's understanding of the result.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant detail. It is concise, though it is so terse that it contributes little beyond the tool name.

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 create operation with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, this description is materially incomplete. It establishes the basic resource and action but misses field semantics, duplicate handling, and usage constraints needed for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not name or explain any of the four parameters (name, code, symbol, decimal_places). It does not compensate for the schema's missing descriptions, leaving an agent to guess formats, constraints, or defaults.

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 uses a clear verb ('Store') with a specific resource ('a new currency'), and the word 'new' helps distinguish it from sibling tools like get_currency, update_currency, and delete_currency. It is not as explicit as naming an alternative or describing scope, but an agent can infer the core operation.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus related tools such as update_currency or list_currencies. There is no mention of prerequisites, uniqueness of currency codes, or conditions under which this tool should not be used.

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