get_tickers_jpy

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully communicate behavioral traits. It only mentions the basic listing and ranking capability, lacking details on data freshness, rate limits, authentication, or side effects.

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 concise with a single sentence covering the core purpose and ranking feature. It could be slightly clearer with separate clauses, but it's efficiently 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 4 parameters, no output schema, and sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It omits output structure, behavior of different views, and how to interpret results, making it incomplete for accurate agent usage.

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 0%, but the description hints at ranking by change rate and volume, partly compensating for missing parameter details. However, it does not explain the 'view' enum or other parameters individually, leaving gaps.

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 a list of all JPY pair tickers with ranking options, using a specific verb (get) and resource (all JPY pairs tickers). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_ticker (singular) and analysis tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_ticker for a single pair or other analytical tools. There is no mention of appropriate contexts or exclusions.

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