get_token_forensics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It describes the tool as reading data and lists analysis types, but does not disclose potential side effects, error behavior, or 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?

One sentence covering purpose and key outputs, no wasted words. Could improve structure by separating usage notes.

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 simple 2-param tool with no output schema, description provides enough context about what it does. It lacks detail on result format or edge cases but is sufficiently complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions, which are already clear.

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's purpose: 'Get forensics and safety data for a token contract address.' It lists specific outputs (honeypot detection, rug pull risk, liquidity analysis), distinguishing it from siblings like deep_analysis or get_agent_reputation.

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 when to use (when needing token safety analysis) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or handling invalid addresses.

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