assets-compareCompare 2-5 cryptocurrencies side-by-side including price, 24h change, volume, market cap, and rank. Pass symbols as a comma-separated list (e.g. "BTC,ETH,SOL").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbols | Yes | Comma-separated list of 2-5 cryptocurrency symbols or names to compare (e.g. "BTC,ETH,SOL") |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| assets | Yes | ||
| notFound | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / changePercent24Hr / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / changePercent24Hr / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / marketCapUsd / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / marketCapUsd / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / rank / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / rank / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / volumeUsd24Hr / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Output schema / properties / assets / items / properties / volumeUsd24Hr / typeAdded value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful operational scope (2-5 symbols, comma-separated) and the metric set, but does not add deeper behavioral details such as ordering, quotes currency, or error behavior. This is adequate given the annotations.
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 two sentences with no filler: the first sentence states the operation and included metrics, the second gives the exact input format with an example. Every sentence earns its place and the key constraint (2-5 symbols) is front-loaded.
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 one fully documented required parameter, rich annotations for safety and idempotency, and an output schema present, the description provides everything an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. No critical gaps remain for this simple comparison operation.
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%, and the schema already documents the symbols parameter as a comma-separated list of 2-5 symbols or names with an example. The description repeats this input format rather than adding new semantic meaning, 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 starts with the specific verb 'Compare' and a clear resource ('2-5 cryptocurrencies'), then enumerates the exact metrics included: price, 24h change, volume, market cap, and rank. This distinguishes it from single-asset or search tools like assets-info and assets-search.
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 clearly states when to use the tool: comparing 2-5 cryptocurrencies side-by-side. It also communicates the required symbol-list format. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it falls just short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.