geckoterminal_dex_pools

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It simply states the function without mentioning pagination (despite a page parameter), sorting behavior, or what data is returned, providing no transparency about side effects, rate limits, or response characteristics.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse, though its brevity also contributes to its inadequacy.

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's four parameters, the presence of pagination and sorting, and more than thirty similarly named pool-related siblings, this minimal description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the returned data structure or how this tool differs from related tools like dex_get_dex_pools or geckoterminal_pool_ohlcv.

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 already documents all four parameters with 100% coverage, including defaults for page and sort. The description adds no parameter guidance beyond what the schema provides, so it stays at the baseline.

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 retrieves pools for a specific DEX on a network, with a clear verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this from many similar sibling tools like dex_get_dex_pools, geckoterminal_get_pool, or geckoterminal_top_pools, which also involve pools.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. With over a dozen DEX-related siblings, this lack of context is a significant gap.

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