Fetches last price, bid/ask, and 24-hour stats for all markets in one public call; no credentials needed. Deprecated: use fetch_tickers instead.
Deprecated: use fetch_tickers. Get tickers (last price, bid/ask, 24h stats) for ALL markets in one call. Public — no credentials needed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does add real behavioral context: deprecation status and 'Public — no credentials needed' (an auth trait an agent must know). It omits rate-limit and pagination behavior, but for a simple public read that is a minor gap.
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 tightly-packed sentences with zero waste, and the most decision-relevant fact (deprecation + replacement) is placed first.
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?
No output schema exists, yet the description enumerates the payload fields (last price, bid/ask, 24h stats), covering what an agent needs. No params and no nested structure mean little is left unstated; only rate-limit/caching behavior is absent.
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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly adds no parameter noise.
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 tickers'), enumerates the returned fields (last price, bid/ask, 24h stats), and scopes it to ALL markets. The contrast with the single-market sibling get_ticker is implicit and the ALL-markets scope is explicit.
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?
Front-loads 'Deprecated: use fetch_tickers', which names the exact replacement sibling. An agent knows both when to use this and, more importantly, when not to — nothing is left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.