pulse_newcomer_whales

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

With no annotations, the description effectively conveys the tool's behavior: it queries for wallets meeting criteria, returns specific fields, and suggests parameter adjustment if no results. It could mention pagination or ordering but is sufficient.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus a brief usage hint. Front-loaded with purpose, then return fields, use case, and tip. No redundant text.

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?

Without an output schema, the description lists all return fields, which is adequate. It covers the essential context for a query tool. Could mention default ordering, but not a major gap.

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?

The schema covers all parameters (100%), but the description adds value by explaining the concept of 'new big players' and providing actionable advice to adjust minNotional. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 finds 'new big players' with specific criteria: recent first lifecycle and large notional. It lists the return fields, making the purpose concrete and distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'pulse_capital_titans'.

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?

Provides clear use case ('who just showed up and is already trading big?') and a troubleshooting tip to lower minNotional. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools.

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