get_token_holders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a ranked read query via 'top holders,' but does not state the ordering criterion, whether contracts are excluded, how pagination behaves, or what fields are returned.

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 first sentence is tight and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence is a cross-sell to `earning_opportunities` that does not help invoke this tool, so it is slightly wasteful but not 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?

For a simple read query with full schema parameter coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should ideally state what the returned holder records contain and how the ranking is determined.

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 all three parameters (token, limit, offset) are already documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond that baseline, such as whether 'top' is by balance or how offset interacts with ranking.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get the top holders of a SIP-010 token.' This clearly distinguishes it from balance and metadata tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from other holder-style siblings such as tenero_holder_stats or runes_get_holders.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_token_balance or get_token_info. The tip pointing to `earning_opportunities` is about yield opportunities, not about selecting this holder-listing tool, so it does not serve as usage guidance.

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