korean-crypto-movers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output content but lacks information on read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. For a data retrieval tool, this is insufficient behavioral disclosure.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: purpose and scope in first, detailed outputs in second, a cost comparison in third (relevant for tool selection). No redundant information, well front-loaded.

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 simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description covers the basics but misses details on return format, possible error codes, or any limitations. Without output schema, the agent would benefit from a brief description of the response structure.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains what each section value corresponds to ('movers'=top price movers, 'volume'=top by 24h KRW volume) and clarifies the limit parameter as per section. This enriches the parameter understanding.

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 it returns top movers and volume leaders on Korean exchanges (Upbit, 263 KRW markets). It specifies the exact data returned, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'korean-market-movers' or 'crypto-top-movers', though the scope is distinct enough.

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 for Korean crypto market data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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