top_market_capReturn the top cryptocurrencies ranked by market capitalization denominated in a quote symbol (tsym); paginates with page parameter.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| tsym | No | ||
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "limit": 30,
+ "tsym": "USD"
+ },
+ {
+ "limit": 100
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "Top coins by market capitalization",
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds pagination behavior and the role of tsym, but does not disclose potential limitations like data freshness, rate limits, or behavior when parameters are omitted.
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, efficient sentence that front-loads the main purpose. Every word adds value with no redundancy or fluff.
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 optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality but misses key details like the meaning of 'limit' and the default behavior when tsym is omitted. An output schema exists, so return values are not needed in the description, but parameter completeness is lacking.
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 must clarify parameters. It explains tsym (quote symbol) and page (pagination), but omits 'limit' entirely. The example in the schema shows limit:30, but the description leaves its purpose unclear.
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?
Description clearly states it returns top cryptocurrencies ranked by market cap using tsym for quote currency and page for pagination. It is reasonably specific but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like top_pairs or top_volume_full, which are related but distinct rankings.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include many ranking and price tools, but no context is given about scenarios where top_market_cap is preferred.
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.