detect_whale_trades

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about whether this is a read-only detection, how results are returned, what chain/scope it covers, or any thresholds beyond the loosely named parameters. Two params (blockRange, minValueUSD) hint at behavior but are not explained.

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?

It is a single short phrase, so not bloated, but it is under-specified rather than concise. Nothing is front-loaded beyond the basic purpose, and the parenthetical synonym adds little.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, 0% param coverage, and a crowded sibling space mean the description should do far more. The agent lacks enough to call this correctly or know how it differs from track_whale_movements.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning for blockRange or minValueUSD. It doesn't state units, defaults, or what 'blockRange' scans over, so the parameters remain fully undocumented. For a 2-param tool at 0% coverage, this is a serious gap.

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?

States a clear verb+resource: 'Detect large transactions,' with 'whale trades' as a synonym. However, it does not distinguish this from the close sibling track_whale_movements or identify_unusual_patterns, leaving the agent unsure which whale-related tool to pick.

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 when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. With siblings like track_whale_movements sharing the whale-tracking space, this omission forces the agent to infer which tool is appropriate from the name alone.

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