Ordiscan: getTopRunesByVolume

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns 'price, market cap, 24h volume, and price change,' which is helpful. It does not discuss pagination or caching, but the annotations cover safety adequately.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that succinctly communicate the purpose and return values. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description states the tool returns four key metrics and mentions the 24h time window. Although no output schema is provided, the description gives a reasonable overview. It could be improved by explicitly stating the descending order or the time range for volume, but overall it is adequate.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (`limit` and `minVolume`), including constraints and default values. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 'Get Bitcoin runes ranked by 24h trading volume.' It identifies the resource (runes) and the verb (get) with a specific sorting criterion. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `getTopRunesByMarketCap`.

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 advises 'Use this to find the most actively traded runes,' providing a clear use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives such as `getRuneMarketInfo` or `getTopRunesByMarketCap`.

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