get_global_stats

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 only states what the statistics are about without detailing response format, rate limits, authentication needs, or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more informative to improve clarity without losing conciseness.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what statistics are returned, their format, or any behavioral traits, making it inadequate for a tool that likely provides complex data. More context is needed to fully understand the tool's functionality.

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 1 parameter with 100% description coverage, so the schema fully documents the parameter. The description does not add any parameter-specific information, but with 0 required parameters and high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate. Since the tool effectively has 0 required parameters (all optional), a score of 4 reflects that the description doesn't need to compensate for parameter gaps.

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 states the tool provides 'global statistics' about 'data available on coinranking', which gives a vague purpose. It mentions the resource (global statistics) but lacks a specific verb or clear differentiation from sibling tools like 'get_global_market_cap_history' or 'get_global_trading_volume_history', making it unclear what exact statistics are returned.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and it fails to differentiate from similar sibling tools that also provide global data, leaving the agent without clear usage instructions.

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