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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior those annotations don't: the ordering contract ("Newest last") and the threshold definitions that determine what appears in the feed, both of which affect how an agent consumes 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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with what fires and followed by the ordering rule; no filler. The phrase "Newest last" is terse and slightly awkward compared with "oldest first / newest last", but it still conveys the order.

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 single-parameter read-only feed with full schema coverage and annotations, the definition covers what alerts are and how they are ordered. It does not describe the fields in an alert record, and with no output schema that is the one remaining gap, though it is modest for an event list.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage (limit, 1 to 300, default 20), the schema already carries the parameter semantics. The description says nothing further about limit, so 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 names the resource (alerts fired on Canton DEXes) and enumerates the exact conditions that qualify: peg breaks, premiums over 1%, hourly moves over 5%, spread-vs-cost clears. That specificity separates it from raw-data siblings like premiums and spreads, which report the underlying metrics rather than triggered thresholds.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no sibling is named as the alternative for a related need (e.g., checking current premiums directly). The threshold list implies the tool is a pre-filtered event feed, but an agent must infer that from the content rather than being told.

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