get_mark_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 usefully discloses that the endpoint is public and requires no credentials, which is real behavioral value, but says nothing about error behavior for an invalid market_id, rate limits, or response shape. Adequate but clearly incomplete for a zero-annotation tool.

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 clauses with the deprecation warning front-loaded, the action second, and the auth profile last. Zero wasted words.

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 trivial one-parameter public read with no output schema the description is nearly sufficient, covering purpose, replacement, and auth. It falls slightly short only in not noting invalid-market handling, which is minor here.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter market_id is fully documented in the schema with an example. The description only reinforces the single-market scope ('for one market') and adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the current mark price') scoped to one market, and explicitly distinguishes itself from its successor fetch_mark_price. An agent can immediately tell what it returns and that it is the legacy variant.

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?

Explicitly marks the tool as deprecated and names the replacement ('use fetch_mark_price'), which is exactly the when-to-use guidance an agent needs on a duplicated sibling. No ambiguity about routing.

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