fomo_get_user_swaps

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It implies a read-only lookup and mentions optional filtering, but it does not disclose response format, pagination, or error behavior. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose and then adds the optional filter. Every word contributes meaning.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, this is adequate for an agent to understand the operation, but the ambiguous id semantics and lack of any return-shape or pagination hints leave notable gaps. It is usable but not fully complete.

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 description maps id to a user and tokenAddress to an optional token filter, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. It does not clarify whether id is a handle, internal ID, or address, and gives no format details for tokenAddress, so compensation for the 0% schema coverage is partial.

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 identifies the resource ('swap history for a user') and the optional filter ('one token'). It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from user-profile siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with fomo_get_trades or fomo_trading_activity.

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 optional-filter clause gives some usage context for the tokenAddress parameter. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over related siblings, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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