get_latest_tokens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses access restrictions and supported networks, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only or describe potential side effects, pagination behavior, or response format.

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, front-loaded with the core action and followed by critical restrictions. No redundant filler, aside from minor typos ('latests', 'Optimum') that do not hinder 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?

For a simple list endpoint with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential constraints (plan, networks) and the resource type. It lacks details about response structure or ordering, but the name and context imply a list of recent token contracts.

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 descriptions cover limit and offset, but the networkFilter property lacks its own description. The description compensates by explicitly listing the allowed network IDs (1, 10, 8453, 42161), adding concrete value beyond the schema. Limit and offset are not enhanced, but the schema covers them adequately.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'list of the latests token contracts deployed' and scope 'latest'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_tokens and filter_tokens by emphasizing deployed contracts and recency.

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 clear conditions for use: it is restricted to Codex Growth and Enterprise Plans and only available on specific networks (Ethereum, Optimum, Base, Arbitrum). This gives exclusions and network context but does not explicitly name alternative tools for other cases.

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