FREE sample of the paid crypto market pulse output (no payment required). Returns a small live subset: BTC/ETH/SOL/USDC prices + Base chain snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses this is a free, live, small subset – providing useful behavioral context about cost and scope. It lacks detail on the Base chain snapshot structure, but for a simple sample tool it is adequate.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately communicates free status and the returned content, making it highly scannable.
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 low-complexity tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description explains what is returned and the free-sample context. It leaves minor questions about the 'Base chain snapshot', but overall is complete for a sample tool.
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?
There are zero parameters, so no schema clarification is needed. The 0-param baseline grants a 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific details, which 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 clearly states the tool 'Returns a small live subset: BTC/ETH/SOL/USDC prices + Base chain snapshot' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the paid crypto_market_pulse by branding as a free sample. This removes ambiguity about what the tool does.
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?
It explains this is a 'FREE sample of the paid crypto market pulse output', implying use when you want a no-cost preview, but it does not explicitly name the alternative for full data or state when not to use. The context is clear, but exclusion guidance is absent.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes: crypto pricing, chain snapshot, DNS, URL extraction, JSON repair, USDC stats. However, 'base_chain_snapshot' and 'crypto_market_pulse' overlap significantly, as the latter includes the former's data, creating potential confusion.
Tool names use a mix of snake_case and plain words (e.g., 'base_chain_snapshot', 'dns_lookup', 'crypto_market_pulse'). There is no consistent verb_noun pattern; most nouns describe the output but vary in style. Acceptable but not uniform.
With 8 tools covering diverse domains (crypto, network monitoring, text processing), the count feels slightly broad but reasonable. A few utilities (extract_urls, json_repair) seem tangential, yet overall the scope is manageable.
For a crypto market stats server, essentials like price queries and chain snapshots are covered. However, missing historical data, chart endpoints, or deeper analytics (e.g., DEX stats) creates notable gaps. The inclusion of unrelated utilities (DNS, JSON repair) dilutes focus and completeness of the primary domain.