nansen: nansen_smart_money_trades

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, providing strong behavioral transparency. The description adds no new behavioral traits beyond confirming it returns trade data; it does not contradict annotations.

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 short sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with the action and resource, immediately useful for an agent. Every word earns its place.

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?

Tool is simple (2 parameters, read-only, no output schema). The description fully covers its purpose and output scope. No missing details needed for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters 'chain' and 'per_page'.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('recent DEX trades by smart money wallets'), and the goal ('Spot what top traders are actively buying/selling'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nansen_smart_money_flows and nansen_smart_money_holdings.

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?

Description implies usage for tracking smart money trades but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., when to use this over nansen_who_bought_sold or nansen_smart_money_holdings). No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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