DexScreener search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's safe and non-destructive. The description adds context about ticker ambiguity and the need for address confirmation, which is useful for correct usage, but it doesn't disclose other behaviors like error handling or rate limits. Given the annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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, dense paragraph that front-loads the primary purpose and includes critical usage guidance. It is slightly long but every sentence contributes useful information, and it avoids redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers what the tool returns, parameter semantics, and important usage caveats. It lacks explicit mention of error cases or rate limits, but those are not critical for invocation correctness given the safety hints.

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% and each parameter has a description (query type, limit range, verbose behavior). The description adds value by noting the default limit and the purpose of verbose, but it doesn't elaborate beyond what schema already provides. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 tool searches dexscreener by multiple query types and returns candidate pairs with specific fields. It distinguishes itself by mentioning the relevance ordering, which is unique among siblings, and the explicit note about ticker ambiguity prevents misuse.

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?

It explicitly advises confirming identity by contract address using dex_token_pairs/dex_pair before any safety check, which is crucial when to use complementary tools. It also specifies the limit range and default, and the verbose flag behavior, leaving no ambiguity.

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