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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that returns include price, 24h change, market cap, volume. However, it does not mention data freshness, rate limits, or any potential side effects. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but could be improved by stating it fetches live data.

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 extremely concise: two sentences. First sentence states purpose, second covers parameters and return. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. The most important info (purpose, ID requirement, sibling reference) is front-loaded.

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 lack of output schema, the description explains return fields (price, 24h change, market cap, volume). It covers essential input details and provides a sibling reference for alternative. This is sufficient for a simple price lookup 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates. It explains the `ids` parameter must be CoinGecko IDs and suggests `crypto_search` as alternative. It explains the `vs` parameter with default and examples. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Current prices for one or more cryptocurrencies' and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool `crypto_search` by specifying when to use each. The verb 'prices' and resource 'cryptocurrencies' are specific, and the mention of CoinGecko IDs adds precision.

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 when-to-use guidance, including when to use `crypto_search` instead. It explains the `vs` parameter options and defaults. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternative scenarios beyond the sibling reference.

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