base-market-data

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the metrics and one-hour window, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, freshness or latency, units, error behavior, or return format.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler. Its terseness reflects missing detail rather than wasted prose.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the one-line description leaves too much unspecified for reliable invocation. It says what data is returned at a high level but not enough about parameters, behavior, or response shape.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 50%, and the description does not mention token_pair or asset_class at all. The schema documents asset_class somewhat, but the description adds no meaning about how the pool identifier is spelled or how asset_class affects the response.

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 identifies the resource clearly: one Base pool, returning price, reserves, and swap volume over the last hour. It is missing an explicit verb and does not distinguish this from siblings such as onchain-price, depth, liquidity-depth, or markets.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no explicit alternative named. The 'last hour' scope implies a time window but does not tell the agent when this tool should be selected over the many related market-data siblings.

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