coingecko_getPoolsByToken

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic operation without mentioning return format, pagination, authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps for a 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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core action. It could include additional structured information (e.g., mentions of optional parameters) without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and minimal annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns and how parameters like 'page' and 'network' affect results. It does not, leaving the agent with insufficient context for effective invocation.

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 only 33% (just tokenAddress). The description does not explain the 'page' or 'network' parameters, missing the chance to compensate for the low coverage. The tokenAddress parameter is adequately described in the schema.

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 specifies the action ('Get'), the resource ('all liquidity pools'), and the scope ('for a token'). It also distinguishes this tool from other coingecko siblings that retrieve different data (e.g., price, OHLCV, trending).

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 implies when to use (when liquidity pools are needed) but provides no explicit guidance on prerequisites, conditions, or alternatives. With many sibling tools, explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' would improve clarity.

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