get_price_limits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the specific data returned (upper/lower limits) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as format, edge cases, or authentication needs. With annotations covering the safety profile, the added value is minimal but sufficient.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly efficient.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, read-only, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequately complete. It specifies the core purpose and scope, though it could mention edge cases or units, which are likely covered by the output schema.

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 0%, meaning the schema does not describe the 'symbol' parameter. The description clarifies it is for a symbol, but this is largely redundant with the parameter name. It adds some context but does not fully compensate for the lack of schema-level documentation.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('upper/lower price limits') for a specific symbol. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_prices or get_orderbook by focusing on price limits specifically.

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 you need price limits for a symbol, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer the appropriate context, but there is no explicit guidance.

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