get_token_info

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It correctly indicates a read operation but lacks details on error handling (e.g., if token doesn't exist), response format, or any limitations. The description is functional but minimal for a read tool.

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?

Single sentence, 18 words, front-loaded with purpose and specifics. Every word adds value. No redundancy or filler.

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 query tool with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and optional parameter. Minor gaps: no mention of error cases or behavior when holder is missing. Still largely complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, describing both parameters clearly. The description adds marginal value by linking 'optionally check a balance' to the holder parameter, but does not provide additional syntax or meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 states the tool retrieves info about a deployed ERC-20 token, listing specific fields (name, symbol, decimals, total supply) and optional balance check. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like deploy_token and get_deployer_tokens, which serve different purposes.

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 for querying token metadata but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_deployment or get_factory_info. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use, leaving the agent to infer context.

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