Fresh launches

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

Annotations already establish read-only and idempotent behavior, so the description correctly spends its words elsewhere. Its real contribution is the cost signal ('Windows over 60 minutes cost more'), a rate/credit trait the annotations do not express; it could still say more about result freshness or ordering.

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, zero filler, with the core scope front-loaded and the cost caveat immediately after. Nothing to cut.

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?

An output schema and annotations cover return shape and safety, so the burden is lighter. Still, for a 4-parameter discovery tool the description never mentions the platform or liquidity filters, leaving the agent to learn those capabilities only by opening the schema.

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 only 50%, and the description only reinforces the 'minutes' window and ties it to the cost note. It says nothing about limit, platforms, or min_liquidity_usd, so half the parameters get no help from either source.

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 concrete verb and resource: 'tokens launched on Solana in the last N minutes, each with its own verdict and reasons.' That clearly separates it from single-token siblings like check_token or preflight, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 statement of when to call this rather than check_token or preflight, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The only conditional content is a cost note about windows over 60 minutes, which is pricing guidance rather than usage guidance.

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