get_token_price

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

NO ANNOTATIONS ARE AVAILABLE, SO THE DESCRIPTION FULLY CARRIES THE BURDEN OF EXPLAINING BEHAVIORAL TRAITS. IT DISCLOSES THAT THE TOOL AGGREGATES DATA FROM COINGECKO, QUBIC OFFICIAL API, AND CRYPTOCOMPARE, AND LISTS THE OUTPUT FIELDS, WHICH IS HELPFUL. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT ADDRESS POTENTIAL ISSUES LIKE SOURCE UNAVAILABILITY, DATA FRESHNESS, OR HOW DISAGREEMENT AMONG SOURCES IS RESOLVED.

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 THAT FRONT-LOADS THE PURPOSE AND IMMEDIATELY DETAILS THE OUTPUT FIELDS. EVERY PART OF THE SENTENCE ADDS VALUE, WITH NO EXTRANEOUS INFORMATION.

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?

GIVEN THE TOOL'S SIMPLICITY (NO PARAMETERS) AND LACK OF AN OUTPUT SCHEMA, THE DESCRIPTION SUFFICIENTLY COMMUNICATES WHAT THE TOOL RETURNS: PRICE, 24H CHANGE, MARKET CAP, AND VOLUME, WITH A SOURCE-BY-SOURCE COMPARISON. IT COULD NOTE THE CURRENCY AND AGGREGATION METHOD, BUT THE ESSENTIALS ARE COVERED.

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, AND THE INPUT SCHEMA CONFIRMS THIS. WITH NO PARAMETERS TO DOCUMENT, THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT NEED TO ADD PARAMETER SEMANTICS BEYOND WHAT THE SCHEMA PROVIDES, EARNING THE BASELINE SCORE OF 4.

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?

CLEARLY STATES A SPECIFIC ACTION (GET), A SPECIFIC RESOURCE (CURRENT QUBIC TOKEN PRICE), AND THE KEY DISTINGUISHING FEATURE (COMPARISON ACROSS MULTIPLE SOURCES). THIS DIFFERENTIATES IT FROM SIBLING PRICE-RELATED TOOLS LIKE CONVERT_QU_USD.

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 THAT THIS TOOL IS FOR RETRIEVING CURRENT PRICE DATA WITH CROSS-SOURCE COMPARISON, PROVIDING CLEAR CONTEXT FOR WHEN IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT EXPLICITLY MENTION ALTERNATIVES OR CASES WHERE ANOTHER TOOL SHOULD BE USED INSTEAD, LEAVING NO EXCLUSIONS.

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