get_kaia_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 discloses useful behavioral context — the backing API path (GET /api/v1/kaia, implying a read-only fetch) and the exact returned fields — but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or freshness/caching of the price data.

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?

Two front-loaded sentences with no filler: purpose and source first, then returned fields. The API path is marginally implementation-level but still informative given there is no output schema.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating the returned fields (usd_price, btc_price, market_cap, etc.) so the agent knows what to expect. Missing only edge details like auth or staleness, which are minor for a public price endpoint.

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 the lone optional 'network' parameter is already documented in the schema. The description never mentions network, so it adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema; a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('KAIA price in USD') plus the data source (KaiaScan), which clearly separates it from siblings like get_gas_price (gas, not token price) and get_kaia_balance (balance, not price). It does not explicitly name sibling tools to route against, so it stops short of a 5.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, and no alternatives are named. Usage is only implied by the tool's obvious single purpose of fetching the current KAIA token price, which matches the 'implied usage' bar rather than clear guidance.

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