searchPythFeeds

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'live feed catalog' and 'symbol substring', implying a read-only search operation, but it does not describe return format, pagination, rate limits, or any caveats about the live nature of the data. This is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary action and provides one practical example, then gives a secondary usage hint. Every word contributes to understanding the tool.

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 one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and the use case. It could be improved by mentioning what the result looks like (e.g., a list of feed symbols), but given the simplicity and sibling context, it is nearly complete.

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 input schema already covers the singular parameter 'query' with the description 'Symbol substring to search for'. The tool description adds examples ('SOL' or 'gold') and the term 'substring', which are helpful but not essential. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds only marginal value beyond what's in the schema.

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 'Searches' and the specific resource 'Pyth Network's live feed catalog' with a matching method (symbol substring). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting it goes 'beyond this server's curated Chainlink list', making its purpose 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?

The description provides a clear use case: 'Useful for discovering feed coverage beyond this server's curated Chainlink list.' This implies when to use it (for exploring Pyth feeds not in the local list). It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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