bobai_tokenomics

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. Only notes neutrality and non-promotional nature, but lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as idempotency, stability, or cost implications.

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?

A single sentence conveys essential purpose and disclaimer, with front-loaded key terms ('Neutral, verifiable value-accrual mechanics'). No unnecessary words, though slightly long.

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?

Given no output schema, the description would benefit from indicating whether output is textual or structured. It adequately states what the tool describes but lacks specifics on the format or details of the return.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% automatically. The description adds meaning by summarizing the content (value-accrual mechanics), which justifies the baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools.

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 provides neutral, verifiable value-accrual mechanics of the token, including deflationary design and trust properties. It distinguishes itself from siblings like price or activity tools, though a specific verb like 'retrieve' is missing.

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 implies usage for understanding tokenomics, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like bobai_token_info or bobai_price. The 'NOT a buy recommendation' clarifies non-promotional intent but lacks direct comparison.

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