get_correlation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the $0.001 USDC cost, which is a helpful behavioral trait, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or return structure. More context could be added, but the fee disclosure is meaningful.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and enriches it with the cost. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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 simple zero-parameter tool, the description conveys the essential context: time range, asset pairs, and cost. No output schema is present, but the return value is adequately described as a correlation matrix. Slightly more guidance on when to use it would improve contextual 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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so no parameter documentation is needed. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for missing schema details.

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 a 30-day price correlation matrix for specific pairs (ETH/BTC, SOL/BTC, SOL/ETH), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_volatility or get_technical_indicators.

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 usage when a correlation matrix is needed, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or provide exclusions. The cost is mentioned, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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