get_token_price

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action ('Get current price and market data') without detailing what 'market data' includes, whether it makes network calls, or any potential variations in response. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated, and no output schema exists to clarify return values.

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, tightly written sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. No unnecessary words or repetition exist, making it concise and easy to parse.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what 'market data' entails, but it leaves this vague. It also lacks usage context or edge-case information, making it incomplete for a tool with only two parameters and no structured output definition.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (token_id and currency), covering 100% of the schema. The description's mention of 'market data' adds a slight semantic hint but does not substantially enrich understanding beyond the schema's field descriptions and examples.

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's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current price and market data for a cryptocurrency'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_trending_tokens or article tools by focusing on price/market data, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about use cases, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools like get_trending_tokens. Only the parameter examples hint at token IDs, but no explicit usage direction exists.

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