crypto_research

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

Description mentions a cost model ($0.05/call via x402 on Base mainnet), which is useful but does not disclose other behaviors such as data sources, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. No annotations exist to compensate.

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?

Description is concise: one sentence stating purpose plus a separate pricing note. Core functionality is front-loaded, though the pricing note could be more integrated.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description does not describe the output format or structure. With sibling tools having overlapping names, the tool's scope remains unclear.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage) with a clear description for the single optional 'coin' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning 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?

Description clearly states it provides a crypto research brief combining price, on-chain, news, and LLM analysis. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'crypto_price' or 'news_briefing', leaving ambiguity about whether it is a superset or a separate tool.

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 like 'crypto_price' or 'deep_research'. Description also lacks any prerequisites or limitations.

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