Token supply info

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

With no annotations, the description compensates by disclosing the cost per call and automatic payment from the configured wallet, which is relevant operational behavior. However, it does not mention data freshness, potential errors, or whether any prerequisites beyond a configured wallet exist.

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 two sentences: the first states the core output data, the second states the payment cost and mechanism. Both are essential and directly relevant, with 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 straightforward read-only query with two fully described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what data is returned and the cost. It does not describe the data source or update frequency, but these are minor for this 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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (chain and token), so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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's purpose: it provides total supply, circulating supply, and decimals for a token. This distinguishes it from sibling tokens like token_price (price) and token_rugcheck (risk), though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieves' or 'returns'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as token_price or token_snapshot. It only mentions the paid nature and cost, which is operational information, not selection guidance.

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