pump_launchToken

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose key behaviors such as on-chain effects, fee requirements (e.g., SOL for gas), whether the token is immediately tradeable, or what happens upon success. For a financial transaction, this is insufficient.

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 very concise, consisting of a single sentence that front-loads the primary action. It could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but it achieves brevity effectively.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, financial transaction, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the outcome (e.g., token address returned), prerequisites, or risks. The optional metadata fields are not contextualized.

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 schema description coverage is high (89%), so most parameters are documented. The tool description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only mentioning 'initial dev buy' which corresponds to initialBuyAmount. No additional parameter details or format guidance are given.

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 the action: launching a new token on Pump.fun via PumpPortal, with an optional initial dev buy. The verb 'Launch' and resource 'new token on Pump.fun via PumpPortal' are specific and distinctive. No sibling tool performs the same function; pump_trade is for trading existing tokens.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. It is implied that this is for creating new tokens, but there is no mention of when not to use (e.g., if token already exists) or related tools.

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