Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies — every parameter (query, size, chain, scope, fields, query_type) is already documented with defaults, enums, and constraints. The description adds modest value by mapping query_type modes to real-world lookup keys (ticker, name, contract address, Gate symbol), but it does not materially extend the schema's parameter documentation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.