Analyze a Pump.fun deployer's performance history including streaks, rolling bond rate, improvement trend, and deployment cadence. Input a wallet address to view analytics.
Deployer skill curve — streaks, rolling bond rate, improvement trend, and deployment cadence for a Pump.fun deployer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| wallet | Yes | Deployer wallet address (base58) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.7.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.) already declare it safe and non-destructive. The description adds context about the specific metrics returned (streaks, bond rate, etc.), which is valuable beyond the 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?
The description is a single succinct sentence that front-loads key terms. No fluff or redundant information.
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 read-only analytics tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns. No additional information is necessary given the simplicity.
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 single parameter 'wallet' has a clear description in the schema ('Deployer wallet address (base58)'). Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add more. 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 that the tool returns a deployer's skill curve including streaks, rolling bond rate, improvement trend, and deployment cadence. It uses specific terms that differentiate it from sibling tools like madeonsol_deployer_alerts.
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 usage for analyzing a deployer's performance over time, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like madeonsol_deployer_alerts or other deployer-related tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.