pyth_get_prices

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, yet it only offers a vague caching note ('independent per-feed cache entries') without explaining staleness behavior, refresh semantics, failure modes for unknown feeds, or rate limits. For a market-data read tool with zero structured safety/behavior metadata, this leaves key operational traits undisclosed.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than disciplined trimming.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description should explain cache/refresh behavior and the return shape (e.g., per-feed price and publish time). It covers only the resource and item limit, leaving significant gaps for a 4-parameter tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 4 parameters, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that `feeds` accepts symbols or feed ids, but says nothing about `cache_ttl`, `allow_stale`, or `force_refresh` — the three parameters whose semantics an agent most needs explained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get latest Pyth prices') plus scope ('up to 100 symbols or feed ids'), which implicitly separates it from the singular pyth_get_price. It does not explicitly name the sibling, so differentiation relies on the plural noun alone.

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?

Usage is only implied: the 'up to 100' batch framing suggests this is the multi-feed fetch versus pyth_get_price, and the cache mention hints at repeated polling. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternatives (pyth_get_price, pyth_stream_prices, pyth_resolve_feed) are given.

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