Monitor real-time prices and performance metrics for a portfolio of cryptocurrency holdings. Returns current price per coin, 24-hour percentage change, portfolio value summary, and top movers. Use for active portfolio management and price monitoring.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| coins | Yes | List of cryptocurrency codes in portfolio to track real-time |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output details (price per coin, 24h change, portfolio value, top movers) beyond the annotations, but does not disclose potential limitations such as data delays or coverage of obscure coins. This is adequate but not richly transparent.
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, evenly split between what the tool does and when to use it. It is front-loaded with the primary action and outputs, with no redundant words or repetition of schema details.
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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what the agent needs: it lists the inputs (via schema), the outputs (price, change, summary, movers), and the intended use case. The annotations provide safety and world knowledge, making this complete for a read-only monitoring 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?
The input schema fully documents the 'coins' parameter with descriptions for both the array and its items (e.g., 'BTC', 'ETH', 'ADA', 'USDC'), so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 uses a specific verb ('Monitor') and resource ('portfolio of cryptocurrency holdings'), and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing portfolio-level metrics (value summary, top movers) rather than single-price lookups. It also outlines the specific outputs returned.
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 clear context for use ('Use for active portfolio management and price monitoring'), which implies the tool is for ongoing portfolio oversight. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like get_crypto_prices, so it lacks explicit exclusions.
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.
The tools are mostly distinct, but get_crypto_prices and track_crypto_portfolio both deal with cryptocurrency data, which could cause confusion. However, the descriptions clarify that one is for general price lookup and the other for portfolio tracking, so the overlap is manageable.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_crypto_prices, get_exchange_rates, get_stock_data, screen_stocks, track_crypto_portfolio. There is no mixing of naming conventions.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped, covering crypto, forex, stocks, and screening without unnecessary bloat. The count is appropriate for the domain.
The server covers the main market data needs for crypto, forex, and equities, plus stock screening. Missing historical data or stock portfolio tracking are minor gaps that agents can work around.