uniswap_fee_growth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only describes what the tool returns (global fee growth accumulators) without addressing read-only behavior, side effects, or limitations. A read-only hint would improve transparency.

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 conveys the essential information efficiently. Every word is meaningful, and it front-loads the main purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not specify the return type or format of the accumulators, which an agent would need to use the result correctly.

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 schema has one required parameter 'poolId' with no description (0% coverage). The description does not explain how to obtain or format this poolId, leaving the agent to infer its purpose. Adding context like 'hex-encoded pool ID from uniswap_pool_id' would add value.

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 that the tool provides global fee growth accumulators for a specific Uniswap v4 pool, used to compute accrued LP fees. The name 'uniswap_fee_growth' is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like 'uniswap_pool_state' or 'uniswap_pool_liquidity'.

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 retrieving fee growth data, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. Context signals show many sibling tools, but no guidance is given.

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