get_altin_gram_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does useful work by naming the data source (Yahoo Finance, gold futures + USD/TRY) and disclosing that the gram prices are calculated rather than quoted. It does not state freshness/latency, failure behavior, or whether a fallback exists when Yahoo data is unavailable.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler; the return content is front-loaded and the data source is a compact trailing note. Efficient, though it could fold the source note more tightly.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers what comes back (ounce in USD, gram in TRY), which karats are computed, and where the data originates. Missing only edge-case behavior (market-closed values, staleness), which is minor at this complexity.

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% — the karat enum is fully documented with meanings (24 = saf altın, 22 = ziynet altını) and a default. The description mirrors that both karats are supported but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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+resource: returns the gold price, in both international ounce (USD) and gram (TRY) terms, and names the two karats covered. It is clearly distinguishable from generic siblings like get_crypto_price or get_bist_price. It does not, however, differentiate itself from get_commodity_price, which is a plausible overlap.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the gold-specific tool rather than get_commodity_price.

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