get_gold_price

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral info. It uses 'Get', indicating a read-only operation, and lists examples. However, it does not discuss data freshness, error handling, or other potential caveats.

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 sentences: the first states the purpose and input, the second lists common codes. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the core purpose and input. It does not explain the return format, but 'current price' conveys the essential output. Given the low complexity, this is fairly complete.

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 the 'code' parameter with examples, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by mapping codes to friendly names (e.g., XAUUSD = World Gold), which helps the agent select the right code.

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 a specific action: 'Get the current price for a specific gold type by its code.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_gold_prices (plural) and get_gold_price_history (history).

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 specific gold type code is known, and it provides common codes to guide the agent. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use sibling tools, so it misses the top score.

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