pump_trade

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as slippage handling, price impact, or transaction costs. The mention of 'bonding curve' hints at non-linear pricing but lacks explanation of implications for execution.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. However, it could benefit from a second sentence about usage or behavior without being verbose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits details about what the user receives (token amounts), the role of slippageBps, and risks associated with bonding curve trades. More context is needed for safe invocation.

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 description coverage is high (80%), so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema details; it does not explain the bonding curve's effect on amounts or the optional slippageBps field.

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 ('Buy or sell tokens') and the specific platform ('Pump.fun bonding curve'), distinguishing it from other trading tools like jupiter_swap or raydium-pools which operate on different protocols.

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 the tool is for Pump.fun tokens but does not explicitly provide when to use versus alternatives or any exclusion criteria. There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use this tool.

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