hyre-pools

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

The description mentions the data included (APR, TVL, volume) but leaves the '$0.001' parenthetical unexplained. Without annotations, it does not clarify read-only behavior, default sorting, pagination, or output format, which is a significant gap.

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 a single sentence with no redundant wording. The cryptic '($0.001)' is a minor distraction, but overall it is concise and front-loaded.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description covers the core returned fields but omits defaults for sort/limit and the meaning of '$0.001'. It is minimally adequate but leaves room for ambiguity.

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 input schema fully covers all three parameters (sort, limit, token) with descriptions, giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool as a 'Meteora DLMM pool list' with key metrics (APR, TVL, volume), making the purpose evident. However, it lacks an explicit verb and does not differentiate from sibling tools like hyre-pool-recommend or hyre-tvl.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, so an agent has no context for tool selection.

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