Get Ticker

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains the two operational modes (all vs. single symbol), lists the returned fields, and states the auth requirement (none). This adds meaningful context beyond the bare function name, though it omits details like rate limits or error behavior, which are less critical for a simple read-only fetch.

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 two concise sentences with no extraneous content. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, the second covers usage and auth. Every word 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 single-optional-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient information: what it returns, how to scope it, and its public nature. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly without ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100%: the schema already documents the parameter meaning and the omit behavior. The description reinforces this but does not add new parameter-level details. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema fully covers the parameter semantics.

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 action ('Fetch') and the specific resource ('24h ticker data') with key fields listed. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_price and get_candles by focusing on the 24h ticker aggregate rather than a single price or historical candles.

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 explicit usage context: omit `symbol` for all markets, pass one for a single market. It also notes the endpoint is public with no credentials required, which helps the agent decide when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the usage instruction is clear and sufficient for this simple tool.

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