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

Discloses cost ($0.05 per call) and payment methods (x402 or API key), which is critical behavioral context not covered by annotations. Also adds disclaimer about educational data. Does not describe rate limits or failure modes, but is transparent about auth and cost.

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 long and includes extensive payment instructions and catalog referral, which is general boilerplate rather than tool-specific. While front-loaded with cost and purpose, it could be more concise; the payment details could be separated into overall API docs.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description lists the main data components returned (dormant moves, APEX signals, regime) and notes educational status. It lacks explicit return format or recency details, but adequately covers the tool's scope and requirements for an AI agent.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter behavior. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 given no parameters. The description adds nothing about parameters, but that is appropriate since there are none.

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 the tool provides a consolidated BTC snapshot including dormant wallet movement state, recent dormant-wallet moves with USD value and years dormant, APEX confluence signals, and market regime. Distinguishes from siblings like get_satoshi_moves or get_market_regime by combining multiple data points in one call.

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 usage: use this for a comprehensive one-call BTC read. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or compare with alternatives. Mentions checking the catalog first, but no direct exclusion or alternative guidance.

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