list_tokens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'via the explorer index' but does not clarify if data is real-time, if the tool is read-only, or any side effects. For a list tool, read-only nature is assumed but not confirmed.

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 sentence that is clear and complete. Every word contributes meaning—verb, resource, ordering, source, and network restriction. No redundant phrases.

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 two documented parameters, the description covers the main purpose and scope. However, it lacks details on the output format (e.g., fields returned), potential latency of the index, and whether the list is up-to-date. Given no 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so description does not need to detail parameters. However, the description adds context about ordering ('most-held first'), which clarifies the effect of the limit parameter. No further meaning beyond schema.

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 action (list), resource (ERC-20 tokens), blockchain (Robinhood Chain), ordering (most-held first), and source (explorer index). It also specifies 'Mainnet only', which is helpful. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_stock_tokens or token_info.

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 use when needing a sorted list of tokens but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like token_info or list_stock_tokens. No negative guidance or prerequisites are provided.

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