crypto_price

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return fields and emphasizes the live nature of the data, but it omits details like data source, freshness, rate limits, or error behavior. For a simple read-only price tool 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 concise and well-structured: a one-line purpose statement, a list of return metrics, an Args section, and clear call examples. Every part adds value; there is no redundant filler.

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 low complexity (one parameter), the presence of an output schema, and the provided examples, the description is complete. It tells the user what the tool does, what it returns, how to use it, and what symbols are acceptable. No critical information is missing.

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 only defines 'symbol' with 0% description coverage, and the description compensates fully with an Args section that explains symbol as a crypto ticker and provides concrete examples (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, etc.). This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw 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 specifically states 'Get live cryptocurrency price in USD' and lists the exact metrics returned (current price, 24h change, market cap, volume, all-time high). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like crypto_historical and stock_quote.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: getting a live cryptocurrency quote. The examples demonstrate typical usage for BTC, ETH, and SOL. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'for historical data use crypto_historical'.

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