Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is only 25%, so the description carries most of the parameter burden. It clearly explains type ('one of coin, exchange, people, tags sets entity kind'), query ('fuzzy text'), and limit ('optional, default 50, max 250'). However, it omits the required 'rationale' parameter from the natural-language params list, even though the schema itself documents rationale well.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.