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

No annotations are provided, so description carries the burden. It describes the live data fields and mentions sorting/filtering, but does not explicitly state read-only nature, return format, or any limitations (e.g., max rows). This is adequate for a list tool but lacks depth.

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 one concise sentence plus two short clauses. It front-loads the core action and packs the data fields efficiently without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (list with filters) and full schema coverage, the description covers the main functionality and data returned. It lacks details on response structure but that's not required since no output schema exists, though such info would be helpful.

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 schema already documents all 4 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds context by mentioning 'Sortable' and 'filter to specific symbols with `symbols`', which reinforces the purpose of the sort and symbols parameters beyond their schema descriptions.

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 'List coins with live futures market data' which clearly states the action and resource. It enumerates specific data fields (price, open interest, funding rate, etc.), distinguishing it from siblings like get_funding_rates which focuses only on funding rates.

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 provides context on usage (sortable, filterable) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over siblings like get_funding_rates or get_market_overview. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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