Coinglass: getCoinglassGrayscaleHoldings

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no behavioral details beyond stating it provides a list. While consistent, it does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, or any constraints beyond what annotations imply.

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, clear sentence with no redundancy or unnecessary words. It is appropriately brief for the tool's simplicity.

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 no output schema, and the description only mentions 'a list of holdings' without specifying fields or structure. For a list tool, this is somewhat incomplete; however, the simplicity of the tool reduces the need for extensive detail.

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?

Both parameters (page, limit) have descriptions in the schema, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline score.

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 that the tool provides a list of holdings managed by Grayscale Investments, using a specific verb (provides) and resource (holdings). It distinguishes itself from sibling Coinglass tools that focus on other assets like Bitcoin ETFs or Ethereum ETFs.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative Coinglass tools. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and siblings.

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