nansen: nansen_who_bought_sold

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is clearly a read operation. The description adds that it retrieves 'smart money wallets' but does not disclose additional behaviors like date range limits or whether it returns buy/sell counts. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and directly communicates the tool's action.

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 covers the basic purpose but does not explain what the output contains (e.g., wallet addresses, amounts, timestamps) or pagination behavior. Given the absence of an output schema, more context would be helpful.

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?

All six parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no new parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides. The link between 'smart money wallets' and the default label_type is implied but not explicit.

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 shows which smart money wallets bought or sold a specific token in a date range. It uses a specific verb ('see') and names the resource ('smart money wallets'), distinguishing it from other Nansen tools that focus on portfolios, positions, or general flows.

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 the tool is for token-level smart money activity but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like nansen_smart_money_trades or nansen_smart_money_flows. No when-not guidance is provided.

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