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

No annotations exist, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions api_key requirement for social data, but doesn't describe rate limits, error handling, or what happens without api_key for other fields. Schema already notes api_key parameter, so description adds minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence with clear front-loading ('Detailed coin info'). Lists specific fields concisely. No wasted words, but could be more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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?

No output schema, but description lists return fields. Missing details on data freshness, pagination, or structure. Adequate for a simple tool but incomplete for complex data like price history or social stats.

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 coverage is 50% (only api_key has a description). The description adds no meaning for the 'id' parameter (no format or source) and only reiterates api_key's role. Users must infer what 'id' refers 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?

Description clearly states it provides 'detailed coin info' listing specific data fields (price, ATH, supply, categories, social). This differentiates from simpler tools like get_price or get_summary, though could be more explicit about the coin identification (ID vs name).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs siblings. The note 'api_key required for social' is the only usage hint, but no when/when-not context is provided.

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