get_token_chart_urls

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals the plan restriction, but does not clarify whether the tool returns image URLs, or any other runtime behavior (e.g., response format, potential errors, authentication needs).

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?

Single sentence conveys purpose and a key constraint without redundancy. Every word earns its place; it's appropriately sized for what it needs to say.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It doesn't describe what the actual returned chart URLs look like, pagination/limits, or whether images are embedded or linked. For a tool returning chart URLs, this lacks essential completion.

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?

Input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. However, it adds no extra nuance about how parameters relate to the chart images; the schema already explains networkId, pairAddress, and quoteToken sufficiently.

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 states 'Chart images for token pairs' with a specific verb ('get' implied) and resource, and adds plan restriction. It's clear enough to distinguish from sibling 'get_token_chart_data' (data vs images), though it doesn't explicitly say 'returns URLs' which the tool name implies.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_token_chart_data or get_token_sparklines. The only contextual hint is the plan restriction, which is a limitation, not a usage recommendation.

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