madeonsol_kol_trending_tokens

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds the 'capital-flow signal' context and subscription restriction, but does not detail return behavior or side effects beyond what annotations cover.

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 sentences front-load purpose and usage condition. No extraneous text; every sentence is essential.

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 3 optional params, full schema coverage, and clear annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, constraints, and param insights. Missing output schema but that's not required per guidelines.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by noting the PRO/ULTRA requirement for sub-hour periods, which is not in schema. Baseline 3 plus incremental context yields 4.

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 ranks tokens by KOL buy volume, a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from KOL siblings like 'kol_hot_tokens' by emphasizing it's a 'pure capital-flow signal'.

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 explicitly notes that sub-hour periods require PRO/ULTRA, guiding when the tool can be used. It implies use for capital-flow ranking but does not explicitly exclude other metrics or name alternatives.

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