get_token_price

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data freshness, caching, rate limits, or error handling. While the purpose is clear, the transparency is minimal.

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?

The description is extremely concise: three sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and usage guidelines follow efficiently. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose and usage guidelines. However, it omits the return value format (e.g., what the price field looks like), which could aid an agent in parsing the response. A small gap, but overall adequate.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., examples for native token addresses). It meets the baseline but adds no extra value.

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 the tool gets the current USD price of a token on a specific chain, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming get_token_details for full fundamentals and estimate_fees for fee estimates.

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 explicitly instructs when to use this tool ('For just the price') and when to use alternatives ('For full fundamentals... use get_token_details', 'For fee estimates... use estimate_fees'). It even clarifies the tool is for standalone token pricing only.

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