Get valuation sources

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the response carries provenance, dates and confidence, includes oracle feed freshness and a missing-price reason, and explicitly does not recommend a price.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scoped by a single dense sentence; nearly every clause enumerates a distinct returned element, so little is wasted. It is long and clause-heavy, but the density is justified by the breadth of the payload.

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 takes on full responsibility for describing return contents and does so comprehensively — value sources, dates, confidence, oracle state and report link. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret the tool is missing.

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% and the schema documents both slug and tokenId, so the description carries no param burden. It adds no format, precedence or lookup-order guidance for the two identifiers, which is the baseline expectation.

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 and resource and then enumerates exactly what 'every value' means: estimate, AVM, Prycd, county assessor, signed DeFi valuations, oracle state, report link. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like get_property or get_lending_market without opening a schema.

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 clarifies the tool's posture ('Presents data with its provenance; it suggests no price') but never states when to prefer it over alternatives such as get_property, ask_fabrica or explain_confidence_score, nor any prerequisites despite both parameters being optional.

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