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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world safety, and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: resolution order against the top 1,000 coins by market cap, oracle provenance with a confidence score, the 30-asset cap, ambiguity handling, and error/charging semantics (isError, not charged).

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?

Front-loaded with the core capability before the routing and resolution detail, and every sentence carries new information. It is dense — a URL, error semantics, and resolution rules in one paragraph — but not padded.

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?

An output schema exists so return shape needn't be restated, and the description still covers the essentials an agent needs: accepted input forms, asset limit, pricing source and confidence, ambiguity behavior, cross-server alternatives, and error/charge behavior.

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 chain enum plus assets array are fully documented in the schema, so the baseline applies. The description does add resolution-format nuance the schema lacks — chain-qualified forms like 'base:0x…', 'coingecko:ethereum', bare 0x addresses, and Solana mints — which nudges it to a solid but not exceptional 3.

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+resource+scope: live USD price and 24h change for up to 30 assets across any chain, priced from DefiLlama's aggregated oracle. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings cex_ticker and price_history, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Provides an explicit 'When to use' clause: current prices by symbol on any chain; routes Solana mint lookups to a named sibling tool on another server and history to price_history. When-not-use is also implicit in the ambiguity note (ambiguous symbols list alternatives).

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