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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses caching behavior ('cached for 10 minutes; stale entries are refreshed on-demand') and specifies the returned data fields. It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but the disclosed behavior is valuable and non-obvious.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with endpoint mapping, then data details, then caching and usage tip. Every sentence contributes information without redundancy, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description lists the key return fields (volume, price changes, transactions, traders, reserve) and explains caching behavior. It also provides usage context via the search prerequisite, making it complete for a single-parameter read-only tool.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter description already states 'Pool numeric ID (from the id field in search_liquidity_pools response)'. The description repeats this same information without adding new semantics, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 states the tool 'Returns real-time momentum data for a specific pool from GeckoTerminal' and maps to a specific endpoint 'GET /pools/analyze/:id'. It lists specific data categories (volume, price changes, transactions, traders, reserve), distinguishing it from search_liquidity_pools and other siblings.

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?

The description provides clear context by instructing to 'Use the numeric id field returned by search_liquidity_pools', implying a prerequisite and usage sequence. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is sufficient for a 4.

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