get_crypto_signals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses a monetary cost ($0.05 USDC) and the nature of the data (current, ranked, fresh), but it does not mention authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. The cost is a useful behavioral trait beyond a simple read.

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, both concise and front-loaded. The first sentence states the tool's purpose and scope, the second adds the cost. Every word contributes, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only retrieval with no parameters or output schema. The description tells what coins, what signal elements (context, regime, freshness), and the cost. It is sufficiently complete for an AI to invoke correctly, though it could mention output format or filters.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered by its emptiness. The description adds meaning by explicitly listing the coins and the kind of signals returned, which compensates for the lack of parameters. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description satisfies it.

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 specific verb 'Retrieve' and names the exact resources (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, ADA) and content (market-intelligence signals, ranked context, regime, freshness). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_single_crypto_signal or get_crypto_risk.

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 implies usage by listing specific coins and 'current' status, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or references to sibling tools are given, leaving the agent to infer that this is for multi-coin current signals.

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