Milli.gold fees

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: it reads live from the site's fees page, explains fee fields as percent/min/max, defines 'mg' as milligrams, and clarifies that delivery means physical gold at a branch.

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 front-loaded with the tool purpose, then adds the return-shape explanation and the sibling alternative without filler. Every sentence contributes useful selection or interpretation context.

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 one-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it explains the fee structure, units, delivery meaning, live source, and when to use mg_trade_quote instead. An agent can select and interpret the call without missing material context.

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 single 'customer' parameter has full schema description coverage, so the schema already explains 'individual' versus 'company'. The description does not add further parameter-specific guidance, so the high-coverage baseline 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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get Milli.gold's current fees for buying, selling, transferring and delivering gold and for wallet withdrawals.' It also explicitly distinguishes the tool from the sibling mg_trade_quote by directing concrete pricing there.

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?

It states the intended use clearly and names the alternative for a different need: 'To price a concrete trade use mg_trade_quote.' That gives the agent an explicit routing rule between current fee lookup and trade pricing.

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