price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the output fields but does not disclose the default currency behavior, the purpose of the api_key parameter, error handling, or any rate limits. The 'Get' verb implies a read operation but lacks deeper transparency.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with a clear purpose, and followed by illustrative examples. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 simple tool with three parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and provides examples. It is missing usage guidelines and api_key semantics, but given the low complexity, it is nearly complete. The main gap is lack of explicit sibling differentiation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'coin' via 'any cryptocurrency' and for 'currency' via the EUR example, but it leaves the 'api_key' parameter entirely unexplained. This is partial compensation, not complete.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly states the resource: current price, 24h change, market cap, and volume for any cryptocurrency. The example prompts demonstrate the tool's scope for individual coins, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like market_overview and top_coins that likely cover broader market data.

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 example prompts imply when to use the tool (e.g., when a user asks for a specific coin's price), but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of sibling tools. Usage context is clear but guidance is not explicit.

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