CSPR[dot]trade MCP

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. While 'List' implies read-only, description does not explicitly confirm safety, idempotency, or what the return structure contains (pagination, token metadata fields, etc.). Only behavioral hint is the optional pricing functionality.

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?

Single 10-word sentence that is front-loaded with action and scope. Zero redundant text; every word serves the definition. Appropriate length for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter listing tool with complete schema coverage. However, lacks description of return values (no output schema exists to compensate), rate limits, or pagination behavior that would help the agent handle the response.

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 coverage is 100% with clear description of currency parameter. Description mentions 'optional fiat pricing' which aligns with schema but adds minimal semantic value beyond what schema already documents ('Omit for no fiat prices'). Baseline 3 appropriate for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Clear verb 'List' and specific resource 'tradable tokens on CSPR.trade'. Platform-specific naming helps distinguish from get_currencies (likely returns fiat codes), though explicit differentiation between these siblings would strengthen it further.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus get_currencies or get_pairs. Mentions 'optional fiat pricing' which implies parameter usage, but lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use recommendations.

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