monobank-bank-currency-rate

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

Annotations provide readOnly and idempotent hints, so the description need not repeat them. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: the performance trait ('Faster than...') and the limitation of supported currency pairs. This enriches the tool's behavioral profile.

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?

Two concise sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded and the additional usage context efficiently appended. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words or redundant repetition of schema/annotations.

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 simple read-only tool with 2 parameters, full schema coverage, and annotations, the description covers all needed aspects: purpose, when to use, defaults, and limitations. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the simple return nature described. No critical gaps exist.

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% with parameter descriptions, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds extra meaning by stating the default quoteCurrency (already in schema) and the specific constraint that only EUR/USD is possible as a non-UAH pair, which is not in the schema. This provides practical usage nuance.

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 uses a specific verb 'Returns' and clearly identifies the resource as 'Monobank exchange rate for a specific currency pair'. It also distinguishes from sibling tool 'monobank-bank-currency' by highlighting the speed advantage for single-rate lookups.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('when you need just one rate') and names the alternative ('monobank-bank-currency'). Also provides a concrete constraint by noting the only available non-UAH pair is EUR/USD, guiding proper usage.

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