query_fan_token_analytics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions The Graph protocol but does not describe read-only behavior, authentication needs, rate limits, data freshness, or any other behavioral trait an agent would need.

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 short sentence with no filler and is front-loaded with the core action. Every part of the sentence is relevant, even if the content is thin overall.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what analytics are returned and give usage context. It does neither, leaving the agent unable to predict the return shape or when this tool is appropriate.

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%, so both parameters (symbol and days) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter format, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb and resource ('Query detailed fan token analytics'), but 'analytics' is vague and does not distinguish this tool from many analytics-oriented siblings like get_market_sentiment, calculate_token_velocity, or get_fan_token_price. An agent cannot confidently tell what specific analytics this tool provides versus those alternatives.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools available. The description only mentions the data source ('via The Graph protocol') and gives no conditions, exclusions, or alternative tools.

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