search_coins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool returns matching coins, implying a read-only search, but it does not add details like case sensitivity, fuzzy matching, pagination behavior, or rate limits. The description is truthful but minimal, offering limited context beyond the obvious.

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 superfluous words. It front-loads the primary action and immediately explains the return value, making it concise 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 (2 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description provides adequate context: it explains what the tool searches and that it returns matches. It could be improved by describing the return structure or fields, but for a simple search tool, it is mostly 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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions searching by name or ticker, which aligns with the query parameter, but it does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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: to search for stablecoins by name or ticker. The verb 'search' and resource 'stablecoins' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like get_coin_metadata or get_market. It precisely conveys what the tool does.

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 implies that this tool is for searching coins when you have a name or ticker, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. The usage context is implied by the verb 'search' but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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