Standard Tools: birdeyeTrendingTokens

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

Annotations already declare it as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. Description adds minimal behavioral context (real-time data, supports chains/sorting), which is also evident from schema. 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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No redundant or superfluous information. Every word adds value.

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?

Sufficient for a read-only tool with 5 parameters fully documented in schema. Could arguably mention return structure (e.g., list of token objects), but description hints at 'price and market data' which is adequate given no output schema.

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 covers all 5 parameters with descriptions and enums. Description does not enhance parameter understanding beyond what schema provides, thus 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?

Clearly states it gets trending tokens from Birdeye with real-time price and market data, specifying multiple chains and sorting options. This differentiates it from siblings like getTrendingCoins or searchCryptoByName.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no when-not or alternative tool mentions. The context of 'trending tokens' is implied but not elaborated upon.

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