get_market_intel

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It declares the tool is read-only with no on-chain side effects and requires a Birdeye API key. This information is useful but could also mention rate limits or error handling. Still, it provides good transparency.

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 concise, with each sentence serving a distinct purpose: stating the main action, clarifying read-only nature, listing use cases, and providing exclusions. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description enumerates the key fields in the returned JSON object. It covers use cases, prerequisites (API key), and alternative tools, making it contextually complete for a simple one-parameter 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the schema's description of the 'mint' parameter ('Solana token mint address') but does not add further semantic detail beyond that.

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 the tool retrieves real-time market intelligence for a Solana token from the Birdeye API, listing specific data returned (price, volume, market cap, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like check_token_safety and full_token_scan by explicitly excluding safety checks.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool (trade sizing, market health assessment, liquidity analysis) and when not to (safety/rug-pull checks), naming specific alternative tools (check_token_safety, full_token_scan).

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