ic_list_exchangesLists supported Iranian crypto exchanges, their native price units, and available data types so you can select the right source for Toman or USDT market queries.
List the supported Iranian crypto exchanges, their native price unit and what each can answer.
Start here. Every price this server returns is already converted to Toman (IRT markets) or is in USDT.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful domain context beyond annotations: that every returned price is already converted to Toman (IRT markets) or is in USDT, which is important for interpreting data.
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?
Two tightly written sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no wasted text. The guidance to start here and the unit-conversion note are both immediately relevant.
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 low complexity of a zero-parameter discovery tool, plus rich annotations and no output schema, the description provides everything an agent needs: what the tool lists, that it is a starting point, and how to interpret returned prices.
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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Baseline 4 is appropriate because the schema is empty and the description correctly does not invent parameter guidance.
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 uses a specific verb+resource ('List the supported Iranian crypto exchanges') and states exactly what information is included: native price unit and what each exchange can answer. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ic_list_markets or ic_get_ticker, which operate on markets/prices rather than exchange metadata.
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 phrase 'Start here' gives explicit when-to-use guidance for this discovery tool. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the context of listing exchanges makes the entry-point role clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.