madeonsol_stream_token

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: the token is valid for 24 hours and which stream types are available. It does not contradict annotations. Additional details like rate limits or authentication are omitted, but the description complements the annotations adequately.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the key purpose ('Generate a 24h WebSocket streaming token'), and efficiently details the two output URLs and their plan requirements. No unnecessary words.

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 zero parameters and the absence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and output fields. It could mention authentication or token usage, but for this complexity level it is sufficiently complete to guide an AI agent.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema coverage. Per rules, baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no parameter-specific info, which 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 generates a 24h WebSocket streaming token, distinguishing between ws_url for KOL/deployer streaming (Pro/Ultra) and dex_ws_url for all-DEX trade streaming (Ultra only). This specific verb-resource combination and scope differentiate it from sibling tools like madeonsol_stream_session_kill or madeonsol_stream_sessions_list.

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 indicates when to use the tool (for generating a streaming token) and includes tier prerequisites (Pro/Ultra and Ultra only). However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it, but given zero parameters, usage context is sufficiently clear without exclusions.

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