get_fear_greed

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It details the index classification and ranges, including typical investor sayings. It does not mention side effects, auth, or rate limits, but for a simple read-only data retrieval, the behavioral context is adequate.

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 well-structured with a clear summary, bullet points for ranges, and a returns section. The inclusion of quotes adds flavor but slightly reduces conciseness. Overall efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no input parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and return classification. It is complete for an agent to understand and use the 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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information because none is needed. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states it retrieves the Crypto Fear & Greed Index and measures market sentiment. The verb 'Get' and resource 'Fear & Greed Index' are specific, and the tool is distinct from sibling technical indicators and other sentiment tools.

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?

Description provides context for use ('timing entries/exits') and explains the index range and interpretation. However, it does not contrast with sibling tools that also measure sentiment (e.g., get_long_short_ratio), so no explicit when-not guidance.

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