PoE2 Check Currency Value

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies partial name matching (case-insensitive), mentions searching against both currency ids and reference item names, and indicates the return includes chaos-equivalent value and trade volume. This enhances understanding of how the tool behaves operationally.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized. It starts with a clear purpose statement, followed by key behavioral details, then parameter explanations with examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, and the examples are directly relevant to tool usage.

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's moderate complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, behavioral traits, and parameter examples. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from more detail on the return format (e.g., structure of 'matched currency' data), though the mention of 'chaos-equivalent value and trade volume' provides some guidance.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal extra semantics: it provides examples for the 'name' parameter (e.g., 'exalted', 'divine', 'regal') and mentions the default league. However, this doesn't significantly enhance meaning beyond what's in the schema descriptions, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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's purpose: 'Look up the current value of a specific currency in Path of Exile 2.' This is a specific verb ('look up') + resource ('currency value') combination. It distinguishes from siblings like poe2_item_price (for items) and poe2_currency_prices (likely broader currency listings).

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 clear context for when to use this tool: for checking currency values with partial name matching. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings (e.g., when to use poe2_currency_prices instead). The examples help illustrate appropriate use cases.

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