get_token_info

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that project descriptions are truncated to 500 characters, and that it accepts both symbols and IDs. It does not explicitly state read-only nature or any other behaviors like data freshness, but the truncation detail and input flexibility add value.

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 focused paragraph that front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence contributes useful information, with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 one required parameter and an existing output schema, the description provides a thorough summary of returned data (market cap rank, ATH/ATL, supply, price changes, etc.). It also mentions the truncation limit, covering all necessary context for agent usage.

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 0% with no parameter description. The description compensates by stating 'Accepts common symbols (BTC, ETH) or CoinGecko IDs,' which adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema's simple 'Symbol' title.

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 detailed fundamental information about a cryptocurrency token' and lists specific data points like project description, market cap rank, ATH/ATL, supply, etc. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning 'For just the current price or market cap, use get_price instead.'

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use context: 'when you need more than just a current price, for example for fundamental analysis, understanding a token history, or answering questions about supply dynamics.' Also tells when not to use it, naming the alternative tool get_price, and specifies accepted input formats (common symbols or CoinGecko IDs).

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