get_currency_rates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the data source (poe.ninja), update cadence (every 5 minutes), the nature of the data (live trading data), and the critical league-name constraint. It could add failure behavior for invalid leagues, but the provided details are substantive beyond what structured fields offer.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and ends with an imperative warning highlighted in uppercase. Every sentence contributes essential information—source, output, freshness, and a critical constraint—with no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description clearly explains what is returned (real-time prices in Chaos Orb equivalent), the source, the update frequency, and the exact league requirement. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and interpret the result.

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% for the only parameter 'league', which already includes a detailed description about exactness. The tool description reinforces this with an uppercase warning but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the exact resource as 'current currency exchange rates from poe.ninja.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like analyze_build or find_arbitrage by stating the output type (Chaos Orb equivalent). This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 when to use the tool—whenever current exchange rates are needed—and explicitly warns to use the exact league name, which is an important usage condition. It does not name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough among the provided siblings.

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