market_coingecko_search

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 only says 'Search' without disclosing behavior such as result limits, match exactness, case sensitivity, or output format. The agent is left unaware of whether results are full objects or just references, and whether search is by partial match or exact match.

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 sentence, 10 words long, with no redundant phrasing. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it highly concise and scannable.

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 1-parameter tool, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks output details (e.g., what fields are returned, pagination, or how to use the results), and no output schema or annotations compensate. However, the simplicity of the tool means the description covers the core purpose sufficiently. A higher score would require mention of result characteristics.

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 100% (query described as 'Search query (coin name or symbol)'), so baseline is 3. The description adds that the search covers coins, categories, and exchanges, which clarifies the query's scope, but does not add further parameter semantics beyond what the schema states.

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 'Search' and the resources 'coins, categories, and exchanges', with the search key being name or symbol. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like market_coingecko_contract or market_coingecko_coin, which target specific data endpoints. The scope is unambiguous.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, it does not mention whether to prefer market_coingecko_coin or market_get_coins for direct coin lookups, or how this search relates to other search-like tools (e.g., geckoterminal_search_pools). The description lacks any contextual or exclusionary guidance.

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