getDexPools

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description does not add behavioral details beyond the schema; it remains consistent with annotations without contradiction.

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 extremely concise (one sentence plus a list of required/optional parameters), front-loading the core action. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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?

Given the presence of 9 parameters (fully described in schema) and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter categories. However, it omits guidance on preferring sort_dir/sort_by over deprecated aliases, which would improve usability.

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%, and the description merely repeats parameter names as REQUIRED/OPTIONAL without adding new semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action: 'Get pools from a specific DEX on a network.' It identifies required and optional parameters, making the purpose distinct from siblings like getNetworkPools (network-level) or getPoolDetails (single pool).

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 explicitly marks 'network' and 'dex' as required, and lists optional parameters. While it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, the context of DEX-specific filtering implies when to use this tool over getNetworkPools or others.

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