Coinglass: getCoinglassEthereumETFNetAssetsHistory

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description does not add behavioral context beyond stating it provides 'historical net assets data'. It does not describe pagination behavior or response structure. With good annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate as description adds no additional behavioral insights.

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?

One sentence of 11 words, no filler, front-loaded with key information. Highly concise and efficient.

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?

For a simple paginated historical data tool with good annotations and schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It lacks details on return value format but is acceptable given the low complexity and presence of sibling tools for comparison.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (page and limit). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is correct as schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 'Historical net assets data for Ethereum-based Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs)'. This uses a specific verb-resource combination ('get historical net assets data') and distinguishes from sibling tools like getCoinglassEthereumEtfList (which likely lists ETFs) and getCoinglassBitcoinETFNetAssetsHistory (for Bitcoin).

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 versus alternatives. The description does not mention any contexts where it should or should not be used, nor does it reference sibling tools or provide when-not scenarios.

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