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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose side effects, return behavior, or auth needs. It does mention 'Requires Authorization: Bearer ba_…', but nothing about what the tool does, its side effects, or limitations.

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 short but cryptic, not concise in an informative sense. It wastes words on vague metaphors and fails to convey essential operational context.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, an agent cannot reliably infer what 'signals' are, what 'hunt chips' and 'wash risk' mean, or how windowMinutes affects results. The description is completely inadequate for safe 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?

Schema description coverage is 50%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented windowMinutes parameter. It does not mention either parameter or add any semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Hunt chips + wash risk' is vague jargon and does not state a clear action on a resource. It offers no link to 'signals' or what the tool returns, and it does not differentiate from siblings like get_token or get_curve.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only mention is an authorization requirement, which is not about selecting this tool over others.

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