List TCMB currencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them — that results come from the 'latest TCMB bulletin' (freshness/source) and that entries carry a 'quoting unit' (interpretation caveat). It says nothing about ordering, caching or coverage of currencies, so it is additive but not rich.

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?

A single tight clause with no filler, and the most decision-relevant qualifier ('latest TCMB bulletin') is placed first. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 parameters, an output schema covering return values, and annotations covering safety, the remaining burden on the description is small. It supplies the two things the structured fields do not: the source/freshness of the data and the quoting-unit caveat. A note on ordering or currency coverage would complete it.

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; the baseline for a 0-param schema is 4. The mention of quoting unit is a data-shape note rather than parameter guidance.

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 names a specific resource (currencies) scoped to a specific source and freshness ('latest TCMB bulletin'), plus a data-shape detail ('their quoting unit'). This separates it from get_exchange_rates and get_rate_history, though the retrieval verb is only implied by the tool name rather than stated.

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 is a pure noun phrase with no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing guidance. An agent must infer from the name and sibling set that this is the discovery step before convert_currency; nothing in the text says so.

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