tenero_holder_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that no authentication is required and that the data comes from the Tenero API, and it names the output metrics. However, it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, mention rate limits, or describe error handling or data freshness.

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 core description is well front-loaded and efficient: it states the purpose, then lists the metrics returned. The closing tip about earning_opportunities is off-topic for tool selection and slightly dilutes an otherwise concise definition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately enumerates the returned values (total holders, top holder percentages, Gini coefficient). Combined with the authentication note and the richly described input schema, this is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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%, with both chain and contractId documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('token holder distribution and concentration statistics'), then enumerates what is returned: total holders, top holder percentages, and Gini coefficient. This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as get_token_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?

The description explains what the tool returns but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like get_token_holders or tenero_token_info. The only cross-reference is an unrelated promotional tip to call earning_opportunities, which does not help the agent choose between holder-data tools.

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