pulse_cohort_recent_trades

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the cohort is defined by 'LAST-30-DAY tier' and that data is 'real-time alpha', but does not disclose key behaviors such as data freshness, pagination, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. Critical behavioral traits beyond the input schema are missing.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the core purpose, and uses no filler. Every word adds value, clearly stating the resource, the cohort definition, and the real-time alpha focus. It is an exemplary model of conciseness.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations. The description explains the cohort definition and intent but does not describe the return format, data fields, or how results are ordered. Given the complexity (5 parameters, many sibling tools), more context about the output would improve completeness. Adequate but not thorough.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the cohort definition ('LAST-30-DAY tier') but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. No additional meaning is added for parameters like limit, since, or useToonFormat.

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 shows 'recent trades by a cohort defined by its LAST-30-DAY tier' using specific verbs ('shows') and resources ('trades by cohort'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing 'real-time alpha weighted to who is hot NOW, not all-time', making it unique among pulse_cohort_* and pulse_recent_trades tools.

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 this tool is for real-time alpha from currently-printing wallets, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like pulse_cohort_trades or pulse_recent_trades. No 'when not to use' or exclusion criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the sibling tool names.

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