get_last_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It accurately describes the read-only nature by stating it 'gets' prices, and it adds useful context like 'spot symbols' and 'latest'. However, it does not disclose return format, error handling, or rate limits, which are relevant for a tool with no annotations.

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 a single sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, and the core verb and object are front-loaded. It is concise without losing necessary detail.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely sufficient. It clarifies the resource and scope. It could optionally mention the return shape (e.g., a mapping of symbols to prices), but for a tool named get_last_prices this is easily inferred, so a slightly above-minimum score is warranted.

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 schema covers 100% of the parameter description, including examples like 'BTCUSDT or ETHUSDT'. The tool description adds the modifier 'spot', but the schema already provides sufficient semantic detail. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 the action ('Get'), the target resource ('latest Binance last-traded prices'), and the scope ('one or more spot symbols'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_book_ticker by explicitly focusing on last-traded prices rather than order book data.

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 description implies usage when a user needs the latest last-traded price for spot symbols, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools such as get_book_ticker exist, but no guidance is provided for choosing between them.

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