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

Annotations already cover read-only status and open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that this is public market-wide data rather than user-specific data, and it notes that `home_tabs` supplies valid `group_id` values. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 core purpose and routing instruction are front-loaded, which is good. However, the description is long for a simple list tool and repeats information, such as the `home_*` group IDs and leaderboard mappings, which could be tightened.

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?

The tool has no required parameters, an output schema, and annotations, so the description is largely complete for invocation. It explains how `group_id` is used and what `home_tabs` provides, though it could briefly clarify the `network` parameter to close the last gap.

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?

There is only one parameter, `network`, which is constrained to the constant `solana` with a default. The description does not explicitly explain the parameter, though it does mention Solana-specific group IDs. With a single const parameter, this is adequate but adds little 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the token groups/categories Moby tracks (themes, sectors, narratives).' It also distinguishes this discovery tool from related leaderboard tools by naming them explicitly, so an agent can tell exactly what this tool returns.

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?

It explicitly says to use this tool to discover a valid `group_id`, then pass it to `get_group_leaderboard`, and it maps the other leaderboard tools to their intended contexts. It also clarifies scope: 'This is public market data about the whole market — it is NOT about the user's own wallet or holdings,' with a pointer to `get_my_` tools for user data.

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