list_common_tokens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the action (list) and output (full coin type addresses), which is transparent for a simple, parameterless tool. No hidden behaviors or contradictions.

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 succinct sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is necessary and adds value.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and low complexity, the description is complete. It fully explains what the tool does and lists the specific tokens returned.

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?

There are no parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by specifying what the tool returns (commonly used tokens and their addresses) beyond the empty input 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 tool lists commonly used Sui token types (SUI, USDC, USDT, WETH, DEEP) with full coin type addresses. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_coin_metadata which operate on individual coins.

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 usage for obtaining a list of common token types, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. However, the context makes it clear, and there are no similar sibling tools.

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