CoinMarketCap MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'paginated list' which hints at pagination behavior, but doesn't disclose key traits like rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, or what 'active' means. For a tool with 19 parameters and no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps for an agent.

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 core functionality. Every word earns its place: 'Returns' (action), 'paginated list' (format), 'all active cryptocurrencies' (scope), 'with latest market data' (content). No wasted words or redundant information.

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 the complexity (19 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, pagination details, or how filtering parameters work. For a data-rich tool with many options, more context is needed to help an agent use it effectively.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for 19 undocumented parameters. It only mentions 'paginated' (hinting at start/limit) and 'latest market data' (hinting at price/market cap fields), but provides no specifics about parameter meanings, defaults, or relationships. This is inadequate given the high parameter count and zero schema documentation.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Returns a paginated list of all active cryptocurrencies with latest market data.' It specifies the verb ('Returns'), resource ('all active cryptocurrencies'), and scope ('paginated list with latest market data'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'cryptoCurrencyMap' or 'cryptoQuotesLatest', which likely serve different purposes.

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. With 19 sibling tools including 'cryptoCurrencyMap' (likely a mapping tool) and 'cryptoQuotesLatest' (likely for quotes), there's no indication of when this paginated list with market data is preferred over other listing or data retrieval tools. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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