madeonsol_token_cap_table

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

Annotations mark as read-only/idempotent. Description adds tier-based access restrictions ('PRO=top 10 truncated, ULTRA=top 20 full, BASIC: 403'), indicating different responses per plan, and filters out deployer wallets. This is valuable beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, followed by tier details. No waste.

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?

Describes returned data (PnL, KOL identity, bot flags) and tier variations. However, 'BASIC: 403' is ambiguous (rejection? error? unclear). No output schema exists, so description mostly suffices but could clarify the BASIC behavior.

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 the single parameter 'mint' with description 'Token mint address (base58)'. Description does not add further meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns 'first non-deployer early buyers for a token, enriched with PnL, KOL identity, and bot flags', and specifies output levels by tier (PRO/ULTRA/BASIC). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on early buyer enrichment, a unique aspect.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like madeonsol_token_buyer_quality. Usage is implied by its focus on early buyers, but no exclusions or context are provided.

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