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

Annotations already disclose read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It adds batching and ranking ('largest'), but it does not clarify whether the limit applies per market or across all markets or how minBalance affects results.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the essential purpose and batch scope immediately.

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?

The output schema and annotations cover return shape and safety, so the description does not need to repeat those. It is still incomplete for invocation because required conditionIds and the two optional filters have no semantic explanation, and there is no guidance for choosing this tool over similar market tools.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining the three parameters. 'Up to 20 markets' gestures at conditionIds, but limit and minBalance are not explained beyond self-evident names and schema defaults, leaving the agent to guess their intended semantics.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get the largest public token holders' and adds a batch scope, 'up to 20 markets.' This separates it from quote/trade/orderbook siblings. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling get_market_holders, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no alternative routing. The phrase 'up to 20 markets' hints at batch use, but an agent is left to infer that without direct guidance.

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