get_currency

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the HTTP method GET and the path, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention authorization requirements, whether user_id is required, return value structure, or error behavior.

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 compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the operation and efficiently encodes the endpoint, so every part 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?

For a simple one-parameter GET tool, this is minimally viable, but with no output schema the description should explain what '币种数据' actually includes and what the response looks like. It also lacks usage context to help an agent choose it among many sibling tools.

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 has one user_id string with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The endpoint path /currency/getCurrencyData/{userId} adds that user_id is used as a path parameter, which is beyond what the schema states. It does not clarify whether the parameter is required, its format, or its exact meaning.

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 states '查询币种数据' (query currency data) and gives the exact GET endpoint, so the verb and resource are clear. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling get_* tools, but the resource is specific enough to avoid serious ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as auth_status, get_sts, or get_me. The only usage signal is the phrase 'query currency data', which is essentially implicit in the tool name and provides no decision support.

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