get_api_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully discloses the shape of the returned data (URL, method, parameters, response format), which goes slightly beyond annotations, but adds nothing about caching, coverage limits, or whether unknown endpoint names error out.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and the returned fields come first, and nothing is repeated from title or schema.

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 read-only lookup with one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return contents (URL, method, parameters, response format), which is roughly what an agent needs to decide to call it. Minor gap: no hint about endpoint-name coverage or failure behavior for unknown keywords.

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% and the single endpoint parameter is documented in the schema with concrete examples ("buy_token", "hl_create_order", "deposit", "portfolio"). The description adds no syntax or matching guidance beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (GDEX API endpoint details) and enumerates the returned fields (URL, method, parameters, response format). It is clearly distinct from execution tools like execute_spot, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling doc-lookup tools such as search_gdex_docs or get_sdk_pattern.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers it should call this when it needs to know how to call a GDEX endpoint. No when-to-use condition, prerequisites, or alternative (e.g., search_gdex_docs, get_skill_file) is named, even though several documentation-style siblings exist.

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