get_price

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool fetches prices 'from each exchange' and enumerates supported exchanges, which is useful. It does not mention output format, failure behavior, rate limits, or how results are structured when multiple exchanges are queried.

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 built from one action-first sentence plus compact, useful lists of examples and supported exchanges. There is no filler or redundant elaboration, making it easy to scan.

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 low-complexity tool, the description and schema together provide enough to call it correctly: the symbol is required, exchanges are optional, and supported options are listed. The lack of an output schema means return-value details are not fully specified, but the phrase 'current price... from each exchange' gives a sufficient mental model.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds examples like 'BTC, ETH, SOL' and repeats the exchange options, but these largely mirror the schema descriptions. It does not add new meaning around symbol normalization, quote currency, or exchange-specific quirks.

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 and resource: 'Fetch the current price of a specified cryptocurrency from each exchange.' It clearly distinguishes get_price from siblings like get_top_ranking, compare_prices, and get_pairs by focusing on single-asset price lookup across exchanges.

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 the usage context: when you need a current price for a symbol like BTC or ETH, and it lists supported exchanges. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over compare_prices or get_pairs, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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