evmscope

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden effectively by specifying data sources vary by chain (Ethplorer vs Etherscan aggregation) and detailing the returned data structure (address, percentage, balance). Missing operational details like rate limits or caching behavior.

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?

Perfectly compact Korean description. Single sentence front-loaded with the action, followed by parenthetical details about data sources and return fields. Zero redundancy—every character 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description compensates by explicitly listing the return data fields (address/share/balance). Covers the essential behavioral context (data sources, limits) for a read-only query tool with well-documented parameters.

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 baseline 3 applies. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance beyond the schema (e.g., when to use symbol vs address), but the schema is self-sufficient with clear descriptions for all three parameters.

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 (조회합니다/retrieves) with clear resource (token holders) and scope (top holders). It distinguishes from siblings like getTokenInfo or getTokenPrice by specifying it returns holder rankings with address, share percentage, and balance data.

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?

Lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternatives. However, the parenthetical specification of data sources (Ethplorer for Ethereum, Etherscan for others) and return fields (address/share/balance) implicitly signals to use this for distribution analysis rather than price queries or transfers.

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