buy-token

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Buy tokens' implies a state-changing transaction, but it does not disclose potential side effects like network fees, slippage risks, wallet requirements, or failure modes. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and platform. There is no wasted verbiage; every phrase earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (an on-chain buy operation) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not mention return values, prerequisites, or edge cases, leaving the agent without essential context for successful invocation. The tool description is bare-bones and incomplete for a transaction-executing 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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (token_address, amount_sol, slippage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's clarity.

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 'Buy tokens on Solana using the Raydium launchpad' clearly states the action (buy), resource (tokens on Solana), and platform (Raydium launchpad). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like jupiter-swap by specifying the launchpad, making the tool's purpose immediately clear.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance is provided. The mention of 'using the Raydium launchpad' implies this is for launchpad purchases, but the description does not state when to prefer it over alternatives like jupiter-swap, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied, not clearly defined.

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