currency_pair_map

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a return type (pandas.DataFrame) and an example URL, but does not disclose output columns, pair direction semantics, or potential edge cases.

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 very concise and uses a clear docstring structure with param/type/return/rtype sections. It has no redundant filler, but it is so terse that it omits important usage details.

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 output schema and a sparse description, the return structure and symbol format are under-specified. The example URL uses currency codes (cny-jmd) while the default symbol is a Chinese name ('美元'), creating ambiguity about what the agent should pass.

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%, so the description must explain the parameter, but it only repeats 'specified currency' and the type str, adding little beyond the parameter name. It does not specify whether the value should be a currency code like 'USD', a Chinese name like '美元', or how to discover valid symbols.

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 states a specific resource: 'all obtainable currency pair data for a specified currency', which clearly conveys what the tool returns. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling currency tools like currency_latest or currency_convert, so it falls short of a 5.

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 the many related currency/forex siblings. The description only says what it returns, with no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or typical use cases.

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