market_get_coin_avg_price

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explain what 'average price' means (e.g., interval, source), whether the timestamp must be exact, or any rate limits/error conditions. This ambiguity could lead to incorrect invocations.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core purpose efficiently, though it could include more context without becoming verbose.

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 2-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable. It states what the tool returns but fails to clarify the 'average' semantics, the exact format of coinId, or any related constraints. Lacking an output schema, this leaves important gaps for correct usage.

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%, so the parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already explains both parameters.

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 ('Get') and resource ('historical average price for a cryptocurrency at a specific timestamp'), clearly stating the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like market_get_coin_chart or market_get_coin_by_id, which may also return price-related data.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the context from the tool name alone.

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