madeonsol_token_candles

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it describes data aggregation source (trade firehose), candle fields, supported timeframes (1m/5m/15m/1h/4h/1d), plan-specific limitations (PRO gives last 30 days, ULTRA adds buy/sell splits, net flow, MEV volume, etc., BASIC gets 403). Annotations are consistent (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc.), and description does not contradict them.

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 structured with clear sentences: purpose, candle fields, timeframes, then two sentences about plan differences. It is slightly verbose but not excessive. Front-loads main 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?

No output schema exists, so description compensates by listing candle fields (t/open/high/low/close/volume_usd/trades/market_cap_usd) and explaining additional ULTRA fields. It also states history limit (last 30 days for PRO) and error condition for BASIC. Complete for a historical data tool.

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 coverage is 100%—all 5 parameters have descriptions. The description repeats the timeframe enum values but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. 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 'Historical OHLCV price candles for a token, aggregated from the on-chain trade firehose.' It uses specific verbs and resources (historical candles, token), and distinguishes from siblings by being the only candle endpoint.

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 warns that BASIC plan users receive HTTP 403, guiding usage by plan level. It does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but given no alternative candle tool exists among siblings, the guidance is adequate.

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