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

Although annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, the description adds meaningful behavior: substring matching, TVL-descending ordering, returned fields including slug/category/TVL/market cap, and the is_chain flag. It also discloses the data source, which is useful context beyond the annotations.

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 search behavior and result shape are front-loaded, followed by routing guidance and provenance. The description is dense but compact, and each sentence adds useful selection or interpretation context.

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 simple read-only search tool, the description supplies the needed result shape even though there is no output schema, and annotations cover the safety profile. The schema handles parameter constraints, so an agent has enough information to invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both query and limit. The description reinforces that query matches name or symbol but adds no new limit behavior or constraints beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource: finds crypto projects by name or symbol. It also defines ordering, return fields, and distinguishes chain projects by pointing to chain_metrics and project_metrics. This clearly separates it from sibling tools.

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 explicitly routes agents to the correct alternatives for chain and coin data: use chain_metrics for the chain and project_metrics for its coin. It also tells agents to use the returned slug with other project tools, providing strong selection guidance.

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