Holder concentration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the cost ('~$0.005 in CIRC') which is a behavioral trait, but lacks information on mutability, side effects, or response format. More detail is needed for a complete picture.

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 very short, which is good for conciseness, but the structure is suboptimal: the cost note ('~$0.005 in CIRC.') appears first and may confuse, while the actual output details follow. It could be reordered for clarity.

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 is simple (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete: it does not explain how to interpret the concentration values, the format of the output, or what 'CIRC' refers to. This leaves gaps for an AI agent attempting to use the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and no explanation of the 'mint' parameter in the description, the agent gains no additional meaning beyond the raw schema. The description fails to clarify what 'mint' represents (likely a token address), leaving the parameter ambiguous.

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 provides holder count and top-5/10/20 supply concentration, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly say 'returns' or distinguish from sibling tools that might also provide holder data.

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 mentions it's a 'key rug/whale signal' implying use for risk assessment, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like token_overview or token_security, and no when-not-to-use advice.

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