fomo_get_trade

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

With no annotations provided, the description should clarify behavior. It only says 'Single trade with token metadata', giving no information about read-only safety, errors, pagination, rate limits, or whether token metadata is embedded or referenced. The behavioral burden is therefore not met.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the core return value ('a single trade'). There is no filler or repetition of the tool name, though the noun-phrase style omits an explicit action verb.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, an agent gets very little context: no response format, no definition of the id, no error behavior, and no detail on what 'token metadata' includes. This is insufficient for confident invocation, especially given the large sibling tool set.

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 0%, so the description must explain the id parameter. It does not explicitly say what the id refers to, what format it takes, or where it comes from; the phrase 'single trade' only weakly implies that the parameter identifies a trade.

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 identifies a specific resource ('Single trade') and indicates it includes token metadata, which distinguishes it from sibling list operation fomo_get_trades. It still lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieves' or 'returns', so it falls just short of a top score.

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 gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as fomo_get_trades or fomo_get_trade_comments. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or routing cues, so an agent must infer usage solely from the name.

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