Search for coins

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns CoinGecko ids and clarifies that other tools expect slug format, which is important for correct downstream use. No contradictions with 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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. The first states the action and output; the second provides essential usage guidance about when to call and the slug/symbol distinction. No filler.

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?

With a rich schema, output schema present, and helpful annotations, the description fills the remaining need: explaining the tool's role in the broader workflow (id lookup). It is complete for a simple search tool.

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% with clear descriptions for both 'query' (name or ticker, with examples) and 'limit' (max matches, range). The description itself doesn't add parameter detail, but the schema already does the heavy lifting, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Find'), names the resource (coins), and states the output (CoinGecko ids). It sets this tool apart from siblings by explaining its role as an id-lookup helper, noting that every other tool expects the slug rather than the symbol.

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 an explicit trigger: 'Call this whenever you are unsure of a coin id'. Clearly distinguishes from other tools by referencing the slug-vs-symbol convention, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name an alternative tool for the same purpose.

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