get_tokens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but there is no mention of authentication, rate limits, or whether results are paginated. The description is minimal but sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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, well-structured sentence with 8 words. It front-loads the main action 'List supported tokens' and then adds the optional filtering condition. No wasted words.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and optional parameters. It could mention that the result is a list of token objects, but that is implied. The tool is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds that filtering is optional, but does not provide format details beyond the schema's comma-separated and example values. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists supported tokens and allows optional filtering by chains and chainTypes. It distinguishes from 'get_token' which retrieves a specific token, and other siblings like 'get_chains'.

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 specifies when to use optional filters ('Optionally filter'), which guides usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or contrast it with alternatives like 'get_token' for a single token.

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