ponzu_get_presale_info

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

The description discloses the tool is read-only (no destructive behavior) and explicitly lists the returned fields (tokens available, launched state, etc.). Since there are no annotations, this disclosure adds necessary behavioral context beyond the input schema.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and return value, with no wasted words. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing fields separately), but it is concise and front-loaded.

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 has only one simple parameter, no output schema, and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and return values. It is complete for an agent to understand what the tool does and what it returns.

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 input schema provides full coverage (100%) with a clear parameter description ('Presale contract address'). The tool description does not add additional semantic meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already states, so a 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 the action ('Read') and the resource ('current state of a Ponzu presale contract'). It lists specific return fields, making the tool's purpose distinct from sibling tools that perform other actions like pricing, claiming, or deploying.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as before performing a buy or refund. The read-only nature is implied, but the description does not state prerequisites or context for use.

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