get_kronos_signals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the $0.05 USDC cost, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or what the response structure looks like. For a read-only getter, this is adequate but minimal.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. It conveys the core function and cost efficiently, earning 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives the essential details: what data is returned (signal context and ranked symbols) and for which assets. It could mention the return format or prerequisites like preflight checks, but the tool is simple enough that this is mostly complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed. It clearly indicates the fixed scope (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, ADA).

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 verb 'get' and specific resource 'current Kronos signal context and ranked symbols' for five named assets. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_kronos_history and get_kronos_forecast by emphasizing 'current', and the asset list adds specificity.

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 use of 'current' implies this is for real-time snapshots rather than historical or forecast data, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools. No exclusions or alternative indications are provided.

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