coingeckotokeninfoagent_get_tokens_by_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral context. It mentions data retrieval but doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior beyond what's in the schema, or potential API constraints. The description adds only basic functional context without operational details.

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 clear, efficient sentences with zero waste. The first states the core function, the second elaborates on returned data. However, it could be more front-loaded by mentioning pagination upfront given the tool's list nature.

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 list-retrieval tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers what data is returned but lacks context about response format, error conditions, or how to interpret the paginated results. With no annotations and no output schema, more behavioral context would be helpful.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain category_id format examples beyond what's shown, or provide context for vs_currency choices. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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's purpose: 'Get a list of tokens within a specific category' with specific data fields (price, market cap, volume, price changes). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_token_info' (single token) and 'get_categories_list' (categories only), but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'get_category_data' which might overlap.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over 'get_token_info' (for single tokens) or 'get_category_data' (which might provide category metadata rather than token lists). The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate.

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