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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. It mentions it's a paid tool ($0.005, POST endpoint), but does not disclose side effects, auth requirements, error handling, rate limits, or whether it's read-only. Lacks critical behavioral context.

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?

Two concise sentences plus one-line cost/API note. Purpose is front-loaded, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return values (e.g., format, fields). Also missing defaults for chain and limit, max candles, and behavior for missing pools. Incomplete for a paid tool with no output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no new meaning beyond listing parameters in a different format, except for clarifying timeframe resolution options (minute, hour, day), which is already in the schema's description. Little added value.

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?

Clearly states it returns OHLCV candles for a DEX pool at multiple resolutions. The verb 'candles' and resource 'DEX pool' are specific. Distinguishes from sibling analytics tools (e.g., analytics_indicators) by providing raw price-volume data.

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?

Implies use for charting data ('Charting data for any pool'), and notes it's a paid tool. But no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives (e.g., analytics_price_at for single price points) or when not to use.

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