pulse_survivors

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

Description conveys the tool is a read-only query that returns specific metrics. Without annotations, it adequately discloses the behavior: it finds wallets based on PnL troughs and recoveries. 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-sentence description front-loads the purpose and is free of redundancy. Every sentence adds value: what it does, what it returns, and a usage hint.

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 listing tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers purpose, returned fields, and usage context. Minor gap: no mention of data freshness or pagination specifics, but not critical.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it mentions returned fields but not parameter details.

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 the tool finds 'comeback traders' with specific condition: wallets whose cumulative realized PnL hit a deep trough and recovered to positive. It lists returned fields, distinguishing it from siblings like pulse_anti_survivors.

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 direct use case: 'Use for who blew up but recovered?' and specifies it uses 'Realized-PnL drawdown only.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but context is sufficient.

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