get_crypto_prices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructiveness, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the annotations: a 0.001 USDC x402 micropayment cost per call on Base and a CoinGecko-with-CoinLore-fallback data source. It omits rate limits or failure/payment behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, return payload second, cost/source last. Every sentence carries distinct, load-bearing information with 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description discloses what is returned (prices and gainers/losers), the cost, and the data provenance. That is sufficient to call it correctly, though the exact response shape is only loosely described.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not invent parameter semantics, and no schema-documented parameters need compensating for.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get live cryptocurrency prices and top 24h movers') and enumerates the concrete outputs (BTC, ETH, SOL, gainers/losers). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from crypto-adjacent siblings like get_dex_quotes or get_gas_prices, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 scope (live spot prices plus movers) implies when it is appropriate, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing to alternatives such as get_dex_quotes. Usage must be inferred from the data it returns.

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