get_cohort_metrics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') and specifies the exact data returned, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as default date ranges, data ordering, or any potential side effects. It is sufficient but not rich.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and context.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters, an enum, and no output schema. The description explains the purpose, the type of data returned, and the intended analysis, which is reasonably complete for a read-only metrics tool. Missing details like return format are not critical given the straightforward nature.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the meaning of cohort metrics (supply, realized cap, realized price) but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it does not explain how start_date overrides days). It adds marginal value.

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's function: 'Get age cohort metrics: supply (BTC), realized cap (USD), and realized price (USD) for a specific UTXO age bracket.' It explicitly names the resource (UTXO age cohort) and the specific metrics returned, making it distinct from sibling tools like get_holder_supply or get_prices.

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 provides a clear use case: 'Used for HODL Waves analysis to track accumulation/distribution by coin age.' This gives context on when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it relative to siblings.

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