Solana bundle / sniper detection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully handles behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool is paid (up to $0.015 USDC per call) and Solana-only. No side effects or mutability details, but the cost and platform constraint are well communicated.

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 short, efficient sentences: one explains purpose, one explains cost. No fluff, every word adds value. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 single-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers essential context: platform, detection concept, and cost. Lacks output format detail but adequate for low complexity.

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 only parameter 'mint' has a description in the input schema ('Solana mint address (base58).'). The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies 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 states the tool detects bundling or sniping for Solana tokens, a strong rug signal. It is specific about the resource (token launch) and action (detect) and distinguishes from sibling tools like token_rugcheck.

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 gives context (Solana only, rug signal) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives such as token_rugcheck or contract_safety. Usage is implied but not clarified.

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