market_coingecko_exchange

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It states what data is returned but does not disclose potential limitations, data freshness, rate limits, required permissions, or error scenarios. The description is purely functional and lacks behavioral context beyond the literal operation.

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 one sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and data types, and every word contributes to understanding. This is a model of concision.

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 parameter, no output schema), and the description names key return fields. However, the context is incomplete because it lacks guidance on alternative tools and does not mention the shape or volume of returned data. It is adequate for a straightforward fetch but not rich enough for an agent to fully anticipate behavior.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The single 'id' parameter is described in the schema as 'Exchange ID (use exchanges list to find ID)', which adds useful guidance. The main description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool gets detailed exchange data with specific fields (trust score, trading volume, tickers). It identifies the resource ('exchange') and the action ('get'), making the purpose understandable. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling 'market_coingecko_exchange_tickers', but the inclusion of trust score and volume suggests broader scope.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like market_coingecko_exchange_tickers or market_coingecko_exchange_volume_chart. The only usage hint ('use exchanges list to find ID') appears in the parameter schema, not in the description. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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