List currencies

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description goes beyond by disclosing the return payload (UUIDs, codes, symbols). For a parameterless list operation, this is sufficient behavioral context; no additional quirks like pagination are mentioned, but none are implied by the simple nature of the tool.

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 concise sentence that fully communicates the function and output. No fluff or 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no params, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains what is returned and the scope ('available currencies'). The annotations cover safety, so no further context is needed.

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, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related text, keeping the focus on the output.

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 lists available currencies, with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('currencies'). It also specifies the returned fields (UUIDs, codes, symbols), distinguishing it from other list tools like 'list_contracts' or 'list_brands'.

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: an agent should use this when needing available currencies. There are no direct alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a simple tool like this. A more explicit 'when to use' is not strictly necessary but could be added.

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