Pumping tokens

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose two high-value facts: a per-call cost of $0.01 and the critical failure mode that no payment is configured so calls return 402. It does not cover pagination, result limits, ordering, or whether the operation is read-only, so it falls short of exhaustive disclosure.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero waste. The content of the list is front-loaded in sentence one, and the cost/402 warning follows immediately where an agent will see it before invoking.

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?

For a parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description gives enough to call it correctly and even flags the 402 outcome. It omits result volume, ordering, and pagination behavior, which would matter to an agent planning a follow-up call.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Schema coverage is 100% on an empty object, so no additional parameter explanation is needed.

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?

States a specific resource and state — 'Pump.fun tokens currently pumping' — with the returned content (quality signals, holder behavior, ratings) named. The 'currently pumping' qualifier cleanly separates it from siblings list_new_tokens and list_graduated_tokens, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the 'currently pumping' filter, which gives an agent a rough sense of when this list is the right one versus list_new_tokens or list_graduated_tokens. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusions, and no mention of how it relates to scan_token or token_trades.

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