Moralis MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format. The mention of 'usd and native' prices hints at output structure, but without an output schema, this is insufficient for a mutation-free read operation.

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 with zero waste. It front-loads the core purpose and includes key details (USD/native prices, contract address, network) without unnecessary elaboration.

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 read-only tool with 100% schema coverage but no output schema or annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks behavioral context, usage guidelines, and output details, leaving gaps in completeness despite the concise structure.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying that 'contract address' relates to the 'addresses' array, which is already clear from the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Gets') and resource ('token price for a given contract address and network'), specifying both USD and native prices. It distinguishes from the sibling 'solana_gettokenprice' by indicating multiple token prices, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other price-related tools like 'evm_getmultipletokenprices'.

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 versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, error conditions, or compare with similar tools like 'solana_gettokenprice' (single vs. multiple) or 'evm_getmultipletokenprices' (EVM vs. Solana).

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