explorer_get_token_info

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

With annotations readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, the safety profile is already clear. The description adds value by specifying the return fields (name, symbol, decimals, total supply, social profiles), which goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It does not discuss error handling or data sources, but for a read-only metadata tool this is acceptable.

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: 'Get token metadata including name, symbol, decimals, total supply, and social profiles.' Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the tool's purpose and return contents. It is complete enough given the schema and annotations, though it could optionally mention that the tool operates on a specific chain and contract address to further differentiate from ticker-based token info tools.

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 100%: chainId is described as 'Chain ID for the target network (required — no default for indexed data)' and contractAddress as 'Contract address (0x-prefixed)'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already fully documents both parameters.

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 'Get token metadata including name, symbol, decimals, total supply, and social profiles.' This uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('token metadata'), and the list of fields distinguishes it from siblings like explorer_get_token_supply (which only returns supply) and explorer_get_token_holders (which returns holders).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is suitable for fetching comprehensive metadata by chain/address, nor does it suggest alternatives like market_search_token or get_token_info_by_ticker for ticker-based lookups.

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