Crypto Market Overview ($0.01)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the cost ($0.01 USDC on Base) but fails to mention other behavioral traits such as read-only status, rate limits, or potential idempotency. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 efficiently convey purpose and cost without extraneous information. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a key behavioral note (cost). It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's function, though it could briefly hint at return format.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per guidelines. The description adds no parameter information (unnecessary) but provides the cost context, which adds value beyond 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 specifies a clear verb ('overview') and resource ('global crypto market'), and lists specific data points (total market cap, 24h change, BTC/ETH dominance). It distinguishes from sibling tools like crypto_movers, crypto_price, and crypto_trending by focusing on a broad market snapshot.

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 usage for getting a high-level market snapshot but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The cost note provides some practical guidance, but no exclusions or context for sibling differentiation.

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