crypto_prices_preview
FREE 1-item sample of live token prices. No payment required.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
FREE 1-item sample of live token prices. No payment required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the tool provides a free sample of 1 item, which is a key behavioral trait (limited to 1 token). It doesn't mention caching or data freshness, but the core limitation is clear.
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 sentence of 8 words, very concise. Every word adds value. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing what is sampled). Still efficient and 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 no output schema, the description should explain the return format or what 'live token prices' means. It doesn't specify which tokens are sampled or the output structure. For a tool with no parameters, this is a gap. Partially complete.
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?
The input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description doesn't need to explain parameters. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate; the description adds no param detail but doesn't need to.
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 it provides a 'FREE 1-item sample of live token prices.' The verb 'sample' and object 'token prices' are specific. It distinguishes from the sibling 'crypto_prices' by being a preview/free sample, so purpose is well-defined.
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 explicitly mentions 'FREE' and 'No payment required,' guiding usage for cost-free testing. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the preview nature implies it's for exploration. Clear context for usage.
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.