List or search justi.fun coins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuine context by disclosing the default ordering and the return shape ('compact rows and nextCursor'), which matters because there is no output schema. It doesn't mention rate limits or what fields 'compact rows' actually contain.

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?

Three sentences, zero waste, with the resource identification and default ordering front-loaded before the parameter guidance and return note.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the necessary work of noting compact rows plus nextCursor for paging, and the filter surface is covered by the schema. Minor gaps: no guidance on the boundary with justi_get_coin and no sense of what a 'compact row' includes.

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 already 83%, with enum values and the status semantics documented in the schema itself. The description largely restates the sort enum and the q behavior already described in the schema, adding little beyond baseline.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List coins launched on justi.fun') with the platform identified as a Solana launchpad on Meteora, plus the default ordering stated. The dual list/search framing plus 'pass an exact mint' implicitly separates it from the single-coin sibling justi_get_coin.

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?

Explains how to search (q for ticker/name, exact mint, or filter by sort) and that newest-first is the default, giving clear usage context. It stops short of exclusions, e.g. it never says to use justi_get_coin instead when you already have a mint and want full detail.

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