get_token_price_comparison

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool produces a 'formatted table' and lists the displayed metrics, which is transparent about what the tool does. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., invalid IDs) or data freshness, which would be beneficial.

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 that are front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a usage workflow. Every word adds value; no redundancy or filler. Highly efficient.

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?

The tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers the function, parameters, and workflow. It is missing details on output format (e.g., table vs raw JSON) and error scenarios, but for a read-only query tool, it is reasonably complete.

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% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that coin_ids should be comma-separated CoinGecko IDs and provides examples ('bitcoin,ethereum,solana,avalanche-2'). This clarification goes beyond the schema's description.

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 the tool compares multiple tokens side-by-side in a formatted table, specifying exactly what data is shown (price, market cap, 24h change, 7d change, 24h volume). It also distinguishes from siblings like search_coins and get_prices by providing a usage workflow.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool ('for a quick multi-token comparison') and provides a clear workflow: use search_coins to find IDs, then compare. It implies not to use it for single coin details, guiding the agent to alternatives.

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