Coinglass: getCoinglassEthereumETFNetAssetsHistory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety. Description adds 'historical net assets' context but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (though implied by schema) or data format. With annotations providing safety profile, description's extra value is limited.

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?

Description is a single sentence with no extraneous information. It conveys the essential purpose concisely.

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?

The tool has a simple purpose and annotations cover safety, but the description omits what the output looks like (e.g., time series structure) and does not clarify pagination beyond schema defaults. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent without prior knowledge.

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% description coverage with clear defaults for page and limit. Description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3.

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 historical net assets data for Ethereum ETFs. The verb 'get' and resource 'historical net assets data for Ethereum-based ETFs' is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like getCoinglassEthereumEtfList.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify that this is for historical net assets only and not for current ETF listings, which are handled by a sibling tool. No 'when not to use' or alternatives mentioned.

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