Deribit Delivery Prices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the data is historical and used for settlement verification, but does not elaborate on pagination, result composition, or any edge cases. This adds minimal value beyond annotations, warranting a baseline score.

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, well-structured sentence with no filler. It states the purpose and intended use efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple read tool with 3 params and no output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps. It does not explain pagination behavior (offset/count), what happens when no data exists, or how it differs from settlements. The annotations and schema cover the basics, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 description does not mention parameters at all. Schema coverage is 67% (index_name and count have descriptions, offset does not). With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3; the description adds no additional meaning so it stays at that baseline.

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 queries historical delivery prices for a specified index, which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes from siblings like get_index_price (current price) and get_public_settlements (settlement events) by focusing on delivery prices specifically.

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 mentions a use case ('to verify settlement of expiring contracts') but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like settlements or mark price history. It provides context but lacks exclusions or comparative guidance.

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