getTokenDetails

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

The description repeats the read-only hint from annotations and adds 'keyless', which provides extra behavioral context not in annotations (no API key required). It explains the output format (single token object with specific fields). While annotations already cover safety, the description adds meaningful detail.

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 concise (~100 words), well-structured with clear sections. It front-loads the core purpose, then provides usage guidance, alternatives, and parameter details. Every sentence contributes value without waste.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it still mentions key return fields (price, volume, metadata, links). It covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameters, usage, and alternatives. With three required parameters and clear schema, it is fully 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% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds a concrete example for token_address (Solana address), which helps the agent understand the format. It also summarizes the parameters, reinforcing the schema without redundancy.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'one token's data and metadata by contract address on one network'. It details the specific metrics (price, volume) and metadata (name, links). It distinguishes from siblings like getTokenMultiPrices and getTokenPools, making the tool's unique purpose evident.

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 explicit usage examples ('price and volume for 0x... on Base'), a clear when-not-to-use case ('if you only have a symbol like WETH, call search first'), and direct alternatives (getTokenMultiPrices for multiple tokens, getTokenPools for pools). This gives comprehensive guidance for tool selection.

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