One-shot token overview

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions cost and aggregation of four data types, but does not disclose behavior on invalid mint, rate limits, or internal API calls. Adds some value but lacks depth.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. Front-loaded with main function, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing included data).

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description outlines the tool's purpose but omits output structure (e.g., what fields 'metadata' covers) and error handling. Adequate but not complete for an agent.

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 0%, and description does not explain the single parameter 'mint' (e.g., token mint address). For a tool aggregating multiple data sources, failing to clarify the parameter reduces usability.

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 'Price + metadata + security audit + active pools in a single call,' specifying the verb (gives overview) and resource (token). It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it 'replaces four' other calls.

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 implies usage when consolidating multiple lookups, but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives like 'circuit_quote' or 'token_security.' The pricing note helps, but guidance is implicit.

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