get_exchange_rate

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

The description discloses that the rate is reference-only and updated every minute, providing useful behavioral context beyond the tool name. However, with no annotations, it does not cover output format, historical data limitations, or other operational details that would fully inform the agent.

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 concise sentence in Korean that effectively communicates the tool's purpose and update cycle without unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not indicate what the response contains (e.g., the rate value, timestamp) or how the optional date_time parameter affects the result. This leaves the agent with gaps in understanding the tool's full behavior.

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 already describes all parameters clearly (base_currency, quote_currency enums, and date_time with ISO 8601 format), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 it queries KRW↔USD exchange rate information, using a specific verb and resource. It also mentions the reference nature and update cycle, distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on stocks, orders, and market data.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or specific use cases. It only states the tool's function without contextual placement.

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