get_token_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It does not disclose any specifics about rate limits, authentication, error handling, or what happens if a token symbol is invalid. This is a gap for a tool without annotations.

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 two concise sentences with no superfluous information. It immediately states the main function and a practical use case, achieving maximum efficiency.

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?

Missing output schema places burden on description to hint at return format. It states 'USD price' but does not specify structure (e.g., number, object with fields). For a simple tool this is marginal but could be more explicit.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds no further semantics beyond 'token_symbol' and 'chain_id'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides adequate parameter documentation.

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 returns the current USD price of a token, specifying the verb 'returns' and the resource 'token price'. It includes a use-case hint ('Use this before swaps') which distinguishes it from swap execution siblings.

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 explicitly advises using the tool before swaps to understand value. While it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives, the use case is clear among siblings like execute_swap.

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