market_coingecko_derivatives

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It simply restates the purpose without disclosing any behavioral traits such as response format, pagination, default filtering behavior, or rate limits. It does not contradict the schema, but it adds no transparency beyond the bare action.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given this is a simple list endpoint with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks important context. It does not specify what fields a 'ticker' includes, whether it returns all derivative tickers from all exchanges, or any caveats. The absence of an output schema increases the need for richer description, but for a simple tool this may suffice.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'includeTickers' with an enum and description. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so the agent must rely entirely on the schema. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'list of all derivative tickers', which distinguishes it from related tools like market_coingecko_derivatives_exchanges (which lists exchanges) or market_coingecko_coin_tickers (which gets tickers for a specific coin). It is specific enough for an agent to understand the core function, though it could be clearer about the scope (e.g., all exchanges vs. a specific one).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is for derivative tickers across all exchanges, nor does it reference sibling tools like market_coingecko_derivatives_exchanges or market_get_tickers. An agent would not know when this tool is the preferred choice.

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