Crypto News

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

Annotations already indicate this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral details: results are limited to the past 48 hours unless timeframe is set, supports pagination tokens, and provides concrete query examples. It does not disclose response structure or rate limits, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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?

The description is well-organized with a summary, argument list, and examples. It is slightly redundant between the first sentence and 'Dedicated endpoint...' but otherwise each section serves a clear purpose and the examples are compact.

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 no output schema, the description at least states the tool returns articles and constrains them to crypto topics and a 48-hour window. It covers the primary parameters and gives actionable examples. It could be more complete by describing the article fields or default paging behavior, but it provides enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already covers all 20 parameters with descriptions, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value by highlighting the most relevant parameters (q, coin, sentiment, timeframe) and providing purpose-driven examples like 'Bitcoin news: q="bitcoin" or coin="BTC"' that clarify how to combine them.

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 opens with 'Fetch cryptocurrency-specific news articles,' naming a specific verb, resource, and domain. It further distinguishes itself from siblings by noting this is a 'dedicated endpoint for crypto/blockchain news with coin-specific filtering' and by limiting results to the past 48 hours.

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 clearly conveys when to use the tool: for cryptocurrency/blockchain news, especially with coin-specific filtering or sentiment. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the 'dedicated endpoint' phrasing and 48-hour window give enough context to differentiate from the named siblings.

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