botindex_meme_velocity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions cost ('$0.02'), which is useful behavioral context, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, output format, or error handling. For a scanner tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 front-loaded with core functionality in the first sentence and includes cost in the second, with zero wasted words. It efficiently conveys essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and cost but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits), output structure, or error handling. For a scanner tool with 3 parameters, this is minimally adequate but has clear gaps in completeness.

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 the schema already documents all parameters (chain, min_score, limit). The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining 'velocity score' or default behaviors. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('scanner', 'detects') and resources ('meme token velocity', 'sudden volume/price spikes'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying cross-platform coverage (DexScreener, Zora, Pump.fun). It avoids tautology by not just repeating the name.

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 implies usage for detecting sudden spikes in meme tokens across specific platforms, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other botindex tools for crypto intel or launches). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat vague.

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