market_get_global

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state safety, data source, update frequency, or any rate limits. There is no mention of what the response contains beyond vague examples, leaving behavioral traits largely undisclosed.

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 that immediately states the tool's purpose. It includes helpful examples in parentheses without being verbose. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides a basic understanding of what it does, but it does not detail the exact return structure or data fields. It lists examples but not a complete response shape, which is a notable gap since no output schema is present. Still, the low complexity keeps it above a 2.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the baseline for such cases is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings, and it appropriately omits any parameter-related details since none exist.

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's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Get global cryptocurrency market statistics.' Examples like total market cap, volume, and BTC dominance further clarify the scope. However, it does not distinguish this tool from similar siblings such as market_coingecko_global, so it loses a point.

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 like market_coingecko_global or other market statistics tools. The description implies usage when global stats are needed, but it lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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