get_crypto_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'real-time' data and the source (Binance), but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether the data is cached. For a read-only price query, the transparency is moderate but could be improved.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with the purpose, followed by usage context, and ends with parameter details in a clear list. Every sentence is necessary and adds value.

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 has an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values, but it still mentions 'prices, 24-hour price changes, and market data.' It covers the parameter adequately. However, it could mention any limitations (e.g., number of symbols, availability of obscure coins) for full completeness.

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 description adds substantial meaning beyond the input schema, which only has a string property with a default. It explains the format (comma-separated names or tickers), provides a clear default, and gives multiple examples. This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 retrieves real-time cryptocurrency prices from Binance, specifying the verb 'get' and the resource (crypto prices). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like convert_currency or wallet_balance by focusing on price data with 24-hour changes 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 explicitly says when to use the tool (to check current crypto prices, 24-hour changes, and market data). It does not provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives, but the usage context is clear and sufficient for typical scenarios.

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