Colombia Official Trm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the rate is officially certified, includes validity dates, and is used for legal purposes, which gives the agent important context about the response's nature. It does not detail update frequency or response structure, but for a zero-parameter getter this is reasonably transparent.

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 brief sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by meaningful context. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the TRM is, why it is important, and what the response contains (rate plus validity dates). The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values, so nothing essential is missing.

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 no parameters, so parameter semantics are not a concern. The schema is trivially 100% covered, and the description adds context about what the returned rate represents, which is useful despite the absence of inputs.

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 opens with 'Get Colombia's official TRM (Tasa Representativa del Mercado), USD to COP', which states a specific verb, resource, and currency pair. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose as retrieving the legally binding official rate, distinguishing it from siblings like colombia_trm_history or currency_convert.

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 context by explaining that the TRM is the legally binding rate used for taxes, customs, and contracts, implying its use when an official, authoritative rate is needed. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving some room for inference.

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