PREMIUM: Detailed metric-by-metric comparison of 2 to 5 coins with all 8 scores and analysis. Requires micropayment via MPP. Data from True Value Rankings (truevaluerankings.com).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| _meta | No | ||
| coins | Yes | Array of 2-5 cryptocurrency ticker symbols to compare |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that a micropayment via MPP is required, and mentions the data source (True Value Rankings). It does not disclose potential outcomes if payment fails or whether the operation is read-only, but it goes beyond a minimal description.
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 that front-loads 'PREMIUM' and the tool's purpose. It covers key aspects without waste, every phrase adds value, and it is easy to scan.
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?
The description covers the purpose, coin count range, output contents (8 scores and analysis), payment requirement, and data source. Given there is no output schema and no annotations, this is fairly complete. It could mention request format or error handling, but overall it provides adequate context for an AI agent to select and invoke the 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 schema covers 50% of parameters (coins with a description). The description reinforces the 2-5 coin count but does not explain the '_meta' parameter, which lacks a schema description. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so a medium score 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 identifies the tool as a premium, detailed metric-by-metric comparison report for 2 to 5 coins, including all 8 scores and analysis. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like compare_coins, which likely offers a simpler comparison.
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 when to use the tool: when a detailed, premium comparison of 2 to 5 coins is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'PREMIUM' label and detailed scope imply a more advanced option than basic comparison tools.
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 target distinct functions (listing, scoring, valuation, comparison, rankings, methodology, history). However, get_tvr_estimated_value and get_tvr_score overlap significantly, as get_tvr_score already includes the valuation data. Compare_coins and get_comparison_report are similar but differentiated by depth.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern, primarily using 'get_' with a descriptive noun. This makes the tool names predictable and easy to navigate.
11 tools is well-scoped for a cryptocurrency analysis service, covering the full range of querying, comparison, and premium features without excess.
The tool set covers the major use cases: discovering coins, obtaining scores and valuations, comparing, ranking, historical tracking, portfolio analysis, and understanding methodology. No significant gaps are apparent.