get_currently_live

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only list of currently-live token launches, which is a small behavioral signal, but it omits any safety profile, pagination behavior, data freshness, or required permissions.

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 noun phrase with no front-loaded action or structure. It is too terse for a tool that has undocumented parameters and no annotations, leaving key information absent.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description does not compensate at all. It fails to explain what is returned, how to page, or how the chain parameter works, making the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

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 tool has three parameters (page, chain, limit) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning for any of them. An agent cannot determine what these parameters filter or control without guesswork.

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 names a specific resource (currently-livestreaming token launches), which is clearer than a tautology and distinguishable from generic token listings. However, it lacks a verb and does not explicitly differentiate from the nearby get_live_status sibling, keeping it from a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which alternatives exist. The description is a standalone fragment with no contextual routing.

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