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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the cost ($0.02) but does not state that it is a read-only operation, nor does it mention rate limits, error handling, or side effects. The read-only nature can be inferred but is not explicit.

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 the cost appended, making it concise and well-structured. However, it could be improved by adding parameter details without losing brevity.

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 three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to explain how to use parameters (e.g., coins format, vs currency) or describe the output structure (e.g., list of objects, table). The cost is noted, but overall context for agent selection and invocation is insufficient.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for the three parameters (vs, coins, api_key). The phrase 'multiple coins' loosely hints at the coins parameter, but the format (comma-separated) and meaning of vs (quote currency) are not clarified. The agent gets minimal guidance beyond the schema itself.

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 performs a side-by-side comparison of multiple coins, listing specific data points (price, market cap, volume, 24h change, ATH). The verb 'compare' and resource 'coins' are specific and distinguish it from siblings like get_price (single coin) or get_summary (summary stats).

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 implicitly guides use for comparing multiple coins, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or recommend alternatives. Siblings exist for single coin or top lists, but no exclusion criteria are provided.

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