Coingecko Get Pools By Token

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds limited behavioral context. It mentions that the data is advisory but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication needs. The description does not contradict annotations.

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 somewhat verbose with SAP MCP context and a list of various data types that are not all relevant to this tool (e.g., 'token prices, trending assets'). It could be more concise by focusing solely on pools.

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?

While an output schema exists covering return values, the description does not explain how pagination works (despite a page parameter) or the role of the network parameter. For a simple list tool with a parameter count of 3, this missing guidance reduces completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already described. The description does not add any additional meaning or usage guidance beyond the schema, such as how to use the page parameter for pagination or the network parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get all liquidity pools for a token') and resource ('CoinGecko on-chain DEX tracker'), making the tool's purpose crystal clear. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like 'coingecko_getOHLCV' or 'coingecko_getTokenInfo' by name and description.

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 states to use it for off-chain market data and that on-chain data remains authoritative, implying advisory usage. However, it does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., when to use pools vs OHLCV), nor does it provide exclusions or alternative tool names.

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