import_token

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the custody model ('managed custody') and a prerequisite, but says nothing about required permissions, whether imports are idempotent or reversible, cost, or what happens on a duplicate token.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action and mechanism front-loaded and the prerequisite second. No filler, though the prerequisite sentence could carry more operational detail for the same word count.

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 two-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves meaningful gaps: it does not say how computedData is produced, what the caller gets back on success, or how partial failure is surfaced.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description adds only marginal value by reinforcing that computedData must be encrypted and pre-built; it says nothing about the optional chainId hint's behavior or valid values.

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 and resource ('Import a user-defined custom token') plus the mechanism ('via managed custody'). It is clearly distinguishable from the trading/portfolio siblings, though it never names a sibling or a counterpart operation.

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 only guidance is the prerequisite that encrypted computedData must be pre-built; there is no statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no note on how to obtain computedData, and no exclusions or failure conditions.

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