madeonsol_token_get

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by listing specific data points returned (price, market cap, volume, deployer reputation, KOL activity, blacklist status) and mentions an 'ULTRA' variant that adds wallet addresses. However, it does not explain how to access the ULTRA data or clarify if there are any rate limits or authentication requirements.

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?

The description is a single clear sentence with a bullet-like list. It is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the mention of 'ULTRA' could be clarified further without much overhead.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description compensates by listing many return fields. It covers the essential data points for a token snapshot. However, it does not mention error cases (e.g., invalid mint address) or response format, which would be helpful for completeness.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage (the only parameter 'mint' is well-described). The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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 provides a 'Comprehensive per-mint snapshot' with specific data fields, and the verb 'get' matches the resource (token info for a mint address). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like token_batch or token_buyer_quality by focusing on a single token snapshot.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about when not to use it or what other tools might be more appropriate for different use cases, such as batch queries or buyer quality analysis.

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