Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get-crypto-priceC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Get current price and 24h stats', which implies a read-only operation, but fails to detail critical aspects like rate limits, error handling, data sources, or response format. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to parse and understand quickly, with zero wasted content.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for effective tool use. It does not explain what the return values include (e.g., price units, 24h stats details) or address potential complexities like handling invalid symbols. For a tool with no structured behavioral data, more context is needed to ensure reliable agent invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'symbol' parameter well-documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples of valid symbols or constraints. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('current price and 24h stats for a cryptocurrency'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-historical-analysis' or 'get-market-analysis', which likely provide different types of cryptocurrency data, preventing a score of 5.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the sibling tools 'get-historical-analysis' or 'get-market-analysis'. It lacks explicit context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving usage decisions ambiguous for an AI agent.

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

• get-historical-analysisC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

  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 states what the tool does but doesn't mention critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the analysis output includes. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the analysis returns, how the parameters interact, or any behavioral constraints. For a tool that presumably returns analytical data, the lack of output information is a notable gap.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description mentions 'customizable timeframe' which loosely relates to the 'days' and 'interval' parameters, but it doesn't add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't compensate with additional insights about parameter usage or interactions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  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 ('Get') and resource ('historical price analysis'), and it adds the customizable timeframe aspect. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its siblings (get-crypto-price and get-market-analysis), which would be needed for a score of 5.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (get-crypto-price and get-market-analysis). It mentions 'customizable timeframe' but doesn't specify scenarios or alternatives, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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

• get-market-analysisC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves analysis but doesn't mention whether it's a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose without unnecessary details. It avoids redundancy and waste, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating key components like scope or limitations.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity of market analysis, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed market analysis' entails beyond top exchanges and volume distribution, nor does it cover behavioral aspects like data freshness or error handling, leaving the agent with insufficient context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'symbol' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond what the schema provides, such as examples of analysis outputs or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed market analysis', specifying it includes 'top exchanges and volume distribution'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get-crypto-price' (price only) and 'get-historical-analysis' (historical trends), though it doesn't explicitly mention how it differs from them.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  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 'get-crypto-price' or 'get-historical-analysis'. The description implies usage for market analysis details but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context.

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