Check a token's DEX market pool, price, and liquidity for free before trading, using its contract address and target chain.
USE WHEN: Checking basic DEX market pool, price, and liquidity for any token without requiring payment (FREE).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain | No | Target blockchain network | base |
| address | Yes | Contract address of the token |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully states the tool is free and focused on basic market data, but it does not clarify read-only behavior, rate limits, data freshness, or response format.
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 the usage condition first and no wasted text. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter read tool.
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?
The description names the key returned data categories (market pool, price, liquidity) and the no-payment constraint. With full schema coverage and no output schema, it is nearly complete, though it could say more about output shape or limits.
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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or formatting guidance beyond the schema's chain enum and address field.
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 states a clear capability: checking basic DEX market pool, price, and liquidity for any token. It distinguishes the tool as a free/basic preview, but does not explicitly contrast it with sibling audit tools.
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 'USE WHEN' phrasing gives a clear condition for invoking the tool: basic DEX market, price, and liquidity checks without payment. It does not name when to avoid it or which sibling to use for deeper audits.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.