get_new_tokens

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose meaningful traits: results are bounded by how long the server's live feed has been running ('since it started'), and the tool deliberately performs no safety analysis. It does not mention rate limits, pagination beyond the limit param, or refresh cadence, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return payload, then the safety disclaimer. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates the returned fields (mint, name, symbol, creator, age), which is exactly what an agent needs. The remaining gap is the absence of any note about refresh/streaming behavior or empty-feed conditions, minor for a two-optional-param read 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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'limit' (most recent first) and 'maxAgeMinutes' are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics such as ordering or unit conventions, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (newly launched pump.fun tokens) plus the data source scope ('observed by this server's live feed since it started'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_risk_score, so an agent can differentiate without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly frames the tool as a discovery-only tool and routes safety assessment to get_risk_score. The when-to-use condition (finding fresh launches) and the when-not-to-use condition (safety evaluation) are both stated outright.

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