list_tradeable_tokens

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full burden. It only states what the result contains (every token swappable) but does not disclose pagination, output format, ordering, rate limits, or any behavioral details. This is a significant gap.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-specified rather than concise. The single sentence does not convey necessary information and wastes the opportunity to provide useful instructions.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is critically underspecified. It does not explain the return value's structure, use cases, or relationship to sibling tools, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 schema defines a single 'args' object with additionalProperties but no descriptions. The description provides no information about what arguments should be supplied, leaving the parameter semantics completely undocumented at 0% 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 'Every token swappable on the DEX' restates the tool's name using synonyms ('tradeable' vs 'swappable') without an explicit verb or action. It lacks a clear directive like 'list' or 'return', making it vague and only weakly differentiated from sibling tools such as get_token_info or find_gems.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool instead of get_quote, check_token_safety, find_gems, get_token_info, build_swap, or submit_swap.

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