frankfurter_latest

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 useful context by naming ECB as the source via Frankfurter, but it does not disclose update frequency, rate limits, or authentication needs.

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 wasted words. It conveys the operation, recency, and data source efficiently.

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-only tool with two optional parameters, complete schema coverage, and supportive annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It does not need to explain return values because no output schema exists, though it could say more about the reference-rate nature of the data.

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 100%, so both the 'to' and 'from' parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter behavior or formats beyond 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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('latest exchange rates'), and adds the data source ('ECB via Frankfurter'). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as frankfurter_historical, frankfurter_convert, or frankfurter_currencies.

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 word 'latest' implies current-rate usage, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus frankfurter_historical or frankfurter_convert. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing are provided.

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