wise_exchange_rates

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it omits the api_key/auth requirement, whether these are live or cached rates, and what the response contains — all things the description should carry.

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 short sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency; it says nothing an agent could act on beyond the namespace.

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 3-parameter, auth-gated external API call with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description leaves out currency-code format, the api_key requirement, and the return shape. Not enough for an agent to call it correctly without guessing.

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% for all 3 parameters. The description never explains that source/target are currency codes (ISO 4217?), whether omitting them yields all rates or an error, or that api_key authenticates against Wise. With zero parameters required, this ambiguity is material and undefined anywhere.

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 verb and resource ('Get exchange rates') and the provider ('from Wise'), but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name wise_exchange_rates. It does not distinguish the tool from the many sibling exchange-rate tools (frankfurter_latest, exchangerate_latest, er_latest_rates, forex_latest, vatcomply_rates) nor say whether a pair or a full rate table is returned.

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 on when to prefer this over the numerous alternative FX tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions. An agent has no basis for choosing it over frankfurter_latest or forex_latest.

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