get_volatility

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses a $0.001 USDC cost and limits data to BTC/ETH/SOL over 24h. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, side-effect-free, or any rate limits. The cost disclosure adds some transparency, but the description remains incomplete for full behavioral clarity.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It conveys the purpose, scope, and cost efficiently.

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 description covers the essential information: what it returns, for which assets, and the cost. However, it lacks an output schema and does not describe the response format. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is acceptable but not exhaustive, so a score of 4 is appropriate.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameters. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately omits parameter 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 24h volatility, range, and annualized volatility for BTC/ETH/SOL. This is a specific verb ('Get') and resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like get_crypto_prices or get_funding_rates, none of which mention volatility.

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 does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name exclusions. However, the asset scope and metric are clear, implying it is for volatility data. No alternative tools are mentioned, so guidance is only implied.

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