Calculate the volume-weighted average price for any Stellar asset pair using SDEX trade aggregations.
Get volume-weighted average price for a Stellar asset pair from SDEX trade aggregations
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of candles to aggregate | |
| baseAsset | Yes | Base asset: "XLM" or "CODE:ISSUER" | |
| resolution | No | Candle resolution | 1h |
| counterAsset | Yes | Counter asset: "XLM" or "CODE:ISSUER" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It usefully discloses the data source ('from SDEX trade aggregations') and implies a read-only operation through 'Get'. However, it does not explain output behavior, how limit/resolution affect results, or any edge cases.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the core purpose without filler or redundant repetition of the schema. Every word contributes to understanding.
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?
The schema covers parameters well, and the description gives the essential purpose. However, with no output schema and no annotation, the return shape is undocumented, and it is unclear whether the tool returns a single VWAP value or a series. This is a notable gap for a tool with multiple aggregation parameters.
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 documents all four parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what is already present in the input schema.
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 identifies the operation: 'Get volume-weighted average price for a Stellar asset pair from SDEX trade aggregations'. It names a specific verb, resource, and data source, and the VWAP concept distinguishes it from siblings like getPrice and getTradeAggregations.
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 implies when to use the tool — when a volume-weighted average price is needed — but it does not explicitly state alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It does not point to sibling tools like getPrice or getTradeAggregations for other price-related needs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.