addresses_listWhales

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes a read-only listing operation with no side effects. While it does not detail auth needs or data freshness, the behavior is straightforward and sufficiently transparent for a simple list retrieval.

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 two sentences: the first declares the tool's primary function, the second adds a practical context. No unnecessary words or repetition. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage context. It does not describe the return format (e.g., array of whale objects), but for a straightforward listing, this is acceptable. More detail could be beneficial but is not critical.

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% for the single 'chain' parameter, meeting the baseline. The description adds minimal extra meaning ('on a specific chain') beyond what the schema already provides ('Chain name (mainnet, base, optimism, arbitrum, polygon)'). No additional constraints or format details are given.

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 explicitly states 'List all available token whales on a specific chain' with a specific verb and resource. The second sentence 'Shows which tokens have known whale addresses for funding test wallets' adds purpose context. This clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'addresses_getWhale' (specific whale) and 'addresses_listTokens' (tokens only).

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 implies usage for 'funding test wallets', providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'addresses_getWhale' for a single token), nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites.

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