bobai_liquidity

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Live' hinting at real-time data but does not discuss authentication needs, rate limits, or read-only nature. The tool has no parameters, so complexity is low, but behavioral gaps remain.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and lists specifics without waste. Every part earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by enumerating return fields (pool reserves, liquidity in USD, etc.). It covers the likely needs for liquidity depth info, though could mention additional details like data freshness.

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?

There are no parameters (schema coverage 100%). The description adds value by detailing what the tool returns, beyond the empty schema. This exceeds the baseline of 3 for high 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 explicitly states 'Live $BOBAI liquidity depth' and lists specific data points (pool reserves, liquidity in USD, LP-burned percentage, price-impact estimates for common buy sizes). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like bobai_price and bobai_trade_info.

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 lists what data the tool provides but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. No exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools are given, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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