Token snapshot (price + supply + safety)

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

With no annotations provided, the description conveys the key behavioral trait of being a paid tool (up to $0.015 USDC.e per call, paid automatically). It also implies a read-only 'snapshot' nature. However, it does not disclose details like what happens on insufficient balance or data freshness, which would warrant a higher score.

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 compact, with two sentences: the first states purpose and cost advantage, the second explains payment details. Every sentence adds value and the most important information is 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?

Although there is no output schema, the description provides a high-level summary of what is returned (price, supply, safety flags). It also covers cost and payment, which is critical context. It doesn't elaborate on 'safety flags' or MPP specifics, but for a simple snapshot tool this is reasonably complete.

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 has 100% description coverage, fully defining both parameters (token contract address and chain). The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, 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 states the tool is a 'one-shot token overview' combining price, supply, and safety flags, which distinctly sets it apart from sibling tools like token_price, token_supply, and token_rugcheck. It also emphasizes the cost advantage, reinforcing its purpose.

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 explicitly says it's 'cheaper than three separate calls', implying when to use this tool instead of calling the individual price, supply, and safety tools. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., if only one data point is needed), but the context is clear.

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