get_top_pools_by_network

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It describes the return format and lists columns, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. As a query tool, basic safety is inferred but not explicitly stated.

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: a single-sentence purpose followed by an Arg list and return specification. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clear 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?

The tool has four optional parameters and no output schema beyond the description, but the description specifies the return columns and explains each parameter. Given the simple query nature, the description is complete for an agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description fully explains each parameter: network, page, sort, include. It provides defaults and acceptable options for sort and include, adding significant meaning beyond the schema's names and types.

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 'Query top pools for a specific network on GeckoTerminal and return a formatted table.' This specifies the verb (query), resource (top pools), and scope (by network), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like get_top_pools_by_dex or get_trending_pools_by_network.

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 implies usage by stating it queries top pools for a network, but it does not explicitly suggest when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_top_pools_by_dex or get_new_pools_by_network. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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