Coingecko Get Top Gainers Losers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context by stating the tool provides advisory data and is part of SAP MCP context, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 three sentences long, with the first sentence stating the core purpose, the second providing SAP MCP context, and the third giving usage guidelines. It is efficient and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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 tool's simplicity (only two parameters, with one enumerated), the presence of an output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the tool's role and the advisory nature of the data, covering the necessary context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters ('duration' and 'vsCurrency'), so the schema already documents them. The description does not add any additional meaning or details about parameter usage, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'Get top gainers and losers from CoinGecko' and provides context about off-chain market data. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling CoinGecko tools like coingecko_getOHLCV or coingecko_getTrending, which could lead to confusion.

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 explains when to use this tool (for off-chain market data such as token prices, trending assets, etc.) and emphasizes that market data is advisory, with on-chain state being authoritative. This provides clear context, though it lacks explicit exclusion of alternatives.

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