Get Recent Spreads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and falls short. It never defines how far back 'recent' reaches, whether results are a snapshot or a historical series, whether pagination is implicit via 'since', or whether any permissions/rate limits apply.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. The size is appropriate, though the brevity comes at the cost of the behavioral and usage detail noted elsewhere.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally viable but leaves the ambiguous time window ('recent') and the return shape unexplained. An agent could call it, but not confidently predict what it gets back.

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 both 'pair' (with example values XBTUSD/ETHUSD) and 'since' (pagination timestamp) documented in the schema itself. The description adds only the phrase 'for a trading pair', which largely restates the required parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource ('Get recent bid-ask spreads') plus the scoping unit ('for a trading pair'), so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from siblings such as get_order_book or get_ticker, which also surface spread-like pricing data.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over the alternatives in the sibling set (get_order_book, get_ticker, get_recent_trades). The word 'recent' hints at a time window but no condition, prerequisite, or exclusion is stated.

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