CoinMarketCap MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns quotes but doesn't mention critical aspects like rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to interact with it safely and effectively.

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 gets straight to the point without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality, making it easy to parse quickly, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is insufficient. It doesn't clarify parameter usage, behavioral constraints, or output format, leaving the agent with inadequate information to use the tool correctly in a real-world context.

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 description mentions '1 or more spot pairs' but doesn't specify how to provide them (e.g., via parameters like 'contract_address' or 'network_id'). With 7 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain what any parameter does or how they relate to the quote retrieval, offering minimal value beyond the bare 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 the action ('Returns') and resource ('latest market quote for 1 or more spot pairs'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'dexSpotPairsLatest' or 'cryptoQuotesLatest', which might offer similar quote functionality but for different data types or contexts.

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 siblings like 'dexSpotPairsLatest' and 'cryptoQuotesLatest' available, there's no indication of what distinguishes this tool's quotes (e.g., DEX-specific, real-time vs. historical), leaving the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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