geckoterminal_pool_tokens_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'get detailed information,' which implies a read operation but does not clarify what 'detailed information' includes, any rate limits, pagination, or error conditions. The description adds no context beyond the tool's name and schema.

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 sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it immediately clear what the tool does. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description adequately conveys the core purpose but does not elaborate on the return structure or the nature of 'detailed information.' Given the lack of an output schema, the description could have provided more context about what the agent should expect, but it is sufficient for a basic read tool.

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 input schema already describes both parameters ('Network ID' and 'Pool contract address') with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameters, so it does not exceed the baseline of 3.

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 'Get detailed information about both tokens in a pool' clearly states the action (get detailed information) and the specific resource (both tokens in a pool). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like geckoterminal_get_pool (which focuses on pool details) and geckoterminal_get_token (which covers a single token) by explicitly scoping to both tokens of a 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where this tool is preferred, nor does it exclude cases handled by other geckoterminal tools. The agent must infer usage from the description alone.

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