get_pool_liquidity

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it fetches data, implying a read operation, but does not elaborate on whether the pool exists, what happens if the token is not graduated, or any specific data returned. It adds 'for a graduated token' which is useful, but not comprehensive.

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 description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words. It is appropriately sized and conveys the essential information.

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 the tool has a simple purpose and full schema coverage, the description is adequate but could mention what data is returned (e.g., liquidity amounts, reserve values) even without an output schema. It lacks details on error cases or prerequisites, but is sufficient for basic usage.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already provides adequate guidance. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since no extra context is provided.

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 action ('Fetch') and the specific resource ('PumpSwap AMM pool liquidity') qualified by 'for a graduated token'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings that fetch token info, holders, trades, etc., by focusing on liquidity of an AMM pool.

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 in the context of graduated tokens, which helps the agent understand when to use it (post-graduation). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, though siblings are available and the context is clear enough.

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