pulse_coin_kings

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

Without annotations, the description discloses the return fields (coin, wallet, coin PnL, fees, lifecycle count, rank), indicates it's a read operation (top earners), and explains the effect of perCoinRank. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences with front-loaded purpose. No fluff. Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameter behavior, return fields, use cases.

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, the description lists what is returned. Parameters are well-documented in schema. The description covers the essential behavioral aspects for agent invocation, though it could mention pagination behavior explicitly.

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%, so parameters are well-defined. The description adds value by explaining the perCoinRank parameter's behavior (top-N vs king) and the optional useToonFormat. The limit/offset pagination is not elaborated beyond schema defaults, but the description focuses on the key parameter.

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?

Description clearly states 'Find the top earner(s) per coin within the window' with a specific verb-resource combination. It explains the perCoinRank parameter and gives example queries ('who owns BTC?'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like pulse_leaderboard or pulse_top_traders.

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?

Explicit use cases are provided ('Use for 'who owns BTC?' / 'who is the best trader of each market?'), guiding the agent on when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the purpose is sufficiently specific.

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