$BOBAI (Brain On BNB AI) on-chain token info: contract, name, symbol, decimals, total & circulating supply, amount burned. BEP-20 on BNB Chain, verified & renounced.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already communicate the safe read-only nature of the tool. The description adds useful context about the token being verified and renounced, but it does not disclose data freshness, caching, or how the burned amount is computed; with the annotation safety profile covered, 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?
One dense sentence packs the resource, chain, contract status, and a full field list with no filler. The important token identity is front-loaded before the details.
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 no-parameter read-only tool, the description provides enough information to anticipate the returned metadata in the absence of an output schema. It could further clarify the precise output shape or point to more specialized siblings, but nothing critical is missing for basic invocation.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema imposes no selection burden; the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description reinforces that no input is needed and enumerates the token fields the agent can expect in the result.
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 clearly identifies the tool as returning on-chain metadata for $BOBAI (contract, name, symbol, decimals, supplies, burned amount) and adds helpful context that it is a verified, renounced BEP-20 token. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like bobai_burned or bobai_circulating_supply, so it misses some differentiation.
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?
No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over the many specialized siblings (bobai_burned, bobai_circulating_supply, bobai_price, etc.). An agent must infer that this is the broad token-info option, and the description never states exclusions or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tools operate on overlapping data: bobai_burned, bobai_activity, and bobai_smart_money all report burn-related metrics, while bobai_token_info, bobai_circulating_supply, and bobai_burned overlap on supply numbers. The long descriptions mitigate this, but the purpose boundaries are less crisp than ideal. The BSC pool tools are more easily told apart.
Most token tools use a consistent bobai_* snake_case prefix, but the set mixes conventions: bnb_agent_*, bsc_pool_scan, find_agents_on_bnb_chain, and pancakeswap_fee_tiers break the pattern. The names are still readable and mostly noun-oriented. There is no chaotic mixing of camelCase or vague verbs, but the pattern is not uniform.
19 tools sits in the borderline heavy range for a token research server. Many are focused data views, but some could be consolidated, such as bobai_token_info with circulating supply/burned, or the informational guide/links/tokenomics cluster. Each tool has a defensible role, but the overall surface feels padded.
Core workflows are well covered: price, liquidity, DEX parameters, purchase guidance, burns, wallet balances, and BNB agent discovery. Missing historical price/volume, holder distributions, or detailed per-agent profiles, but these are minor gaps rather than dead ends. The server gives an agent what it needs to understand and interact with $BOBAI.