Get Asset Info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It implies a safe read-only listing and communicates scope ('all available assets'), but it never states that it is read-only, whether pagination applies, or what the result looks like. For a zero-parameter list call the risk is low, so this is adequate but thin.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though 'with their details' is vague enough that the sentence could carry slightly more concrete content without bloat.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information, and it does not say what 'details' are returned (names, symbols, decimals, status). For a simple list call that omission is tolerable but leaves the agent guessing about the response shape.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; baseline 4 applies. No parameter-related omissions exist.

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?

States a specific resource (assets on Kraken) and that it lists them with details, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_tradable_pairs (pairs) or get_ticker (price data). The verb 'List' conflicts slightly with the singular tool name 'get_asset_info', but the intent is still unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus get_tradable_pairs or other market-data siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites stated. The agent must infer that this is the metadata lookup for asset codes.

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