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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It does not disclose return format, limitations, data recency, or any side effects. The content categories are helpful but behavioral traits are largely absent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's scope and a filter option. No redundant words or filler.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about what data is covered, but it lacks detail on how results are returned (e.g., ordering, metrics, or formatting). It's complete enough for basic understanding but leaves several usage questions unanswered.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters (chain, limit) with descriptions, giving baseline 3. The description adds limited value—'Filter by chain' restates the parameter without enriching it, and no additional detail about limit or chain-specific behavior is provided.

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 indicates the tool's subject (whale activity across DeFi) and lists specific content categories (top boosted tokens, community takeovers, CoinGecko trending). It is specific enough to differentiate from sibling tools like flow_scan or chain_flows, though it lacks a direct verb such as 'list' or 'get'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like alpha_signal or institutional. The only usage hint is 'Filter by chain,' but no explicit conditions or exclusions are given.

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