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

Annotations already declare the tool safe and read-only. The description adds the score_normalised interpretation, which provides useful context about the output but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like network calls, latency, or error conditions.

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 one short sentence plus a clarifying note on the score range. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only tool, the description adequately explains the purpose and the meaning of the key output score. It doesn't explain error handling or response format, but with no output schema and low complexity, this is sufficient.

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 fully documents the single parameter tokenMint with its description, so the description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Check' with the resource 'token' and clearly states the function is identifying rugs/scams. It also clarifies the score_normalised scale, which distinguishes this from generic token info tools like tokenMetadataInfo.

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 gives no explicit usage guidance, prerequisites, or mention of alternative tools. It only states the core action without advising when to choose this over other token-related sibling tools such as findSolanaGems or getPumpFunTokens.

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