get_fear_greed_index

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

The description explains the index as a contrarian indicator, details the components (volatility, momentum, etc.), and specifies that higher values mean greedier. With no annotations, it provides sufficient behavioral context.

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 structured with a clear purpose statement, context, and Args/Returns sections. It is efficient but slightly longer than necessary; still, every sentence adds value.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers usage, parameter semantics, and return format, including field details and interpretation. No gaps.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description's Args section thoroughly explains the 'limit' parameter, including defaults and special value (0 = all history), adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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 the Crypto Fear & Greed Index, defines the 0-100 scale, and distinguishes it from sibling tools by focusing on a specific sentiment indicator.

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 suggests use for 'are people fearful or greedy right now?' questions, indicating appropriate context. It does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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