get_intel_whale_moves

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the payment cost (0.002 SOL via x402) and the data threshold (positions > 1 SOL). It doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'get' strongly implies it. The cost disclosure is valuable beyond the schema.

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 with no redundant wording. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows with the key cost constraint. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description hints at return content ('whale sentiment split'). It includes the essential payment context. It could be more explicit about return fields, but for a simple get tool, it's adequately complete.

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 itself adds no extra parameter meaning; the schema already explains 'Market public key' and 'Payment transaction signature... Omit to get pricing info' more thoroughly than the tool description.

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 'Get whale position data for a market' with a specific verb and resource. The parenthetical '(positions > 1 SOL, whale sentiment split)' adds concrete scope and helps distinguish it from sibling intel tools like get_intel_sentiment or get_intel_market_alpha.

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 when to use this tool: when whale position data is needed. The mention of cost and payment protocol adds an important usage consideration. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the clear purpose is enough guidance.

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