coingecko_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly conveys a read-only search that returns a CoinGecko ID, but it does not disclose behaviors such as multiple-match results, no-match handling, response structure, or case sensitivity.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise, readable, and free of filler or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), and the description explains the primary output (CoinGecko ID) and intended sequencing. However, without an output schema it does not clarify what happens with ambiguous or missing matches, leaving an important gap for a search tool.

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%, so the schema already documents the 'query' parameter. The description adds extra examples and reinforces the 'not both' constraint, but these are largely redundant with the schema's own example ('BTC' or 'Bitcoin', but not 'BTC Bitcoin'). No new parameter-level semantics are provided.

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 ('Search') and clearly identifies the resource (coins) and the goal (get their CoinGecko ID). It distinguishes this tool as a first-step lookup before querying detailed information, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the similarly named sibling market_coingecko_search.

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 provides clear usage context: use when you need a CoinGecko ID before detailed queries, and only provide one search term (ticker OR name, not both). It lacks an explicit alternative tool recommendation, so it stops short of a 5.

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