get_prices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'real-time' and explicitly lists the four coins, which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose potential rate limits or response behavior (e.g., what happens if a price is unavailable).

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 a single, clear, and concise sentence. Every word adds value: 'Get' (verb), 'real-time' (freshness), 'USD' (currency), 'prices' (resource), and the list of coins (scope). No unnecessary wording.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete for a simple price retrieval tool. It specifies what prices are returned (USD and specific coins). However, it does not describe the output format (e.g., JSON structure), which could be inferred but is not explicitly stated. Still, the low complexity means this gap is minor.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details, as there are none. The baseline score of 4 is appropriate because the schema already fully documents the parameter space.

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 specifies the action (get), resource (real-time USD prices), and scope (BTC, SOL, ETH, XMR). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_assets or check_portfolio, which have different purposes.

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 for retrieving prices of the listed cryptocurrencies but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_assets for broader data or set_price_alert for monitoring). No exclusion criteria or context-specific recommendations are given.

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