geckoterminal_top_pools

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get top pools' but does not describe what data is returned, how 'top' is determined, whether pagination is supported, or any implications such as rate limits. The vague 'by various metrics' leaves behavior unclear.

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 of 10 words, which is appropriately concise. However, it is slightly under-specified due to the vague phrase 'various metrics', but this does not detract significantly from its efficient structure.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain return values and nuances. It fails to mention that the tool likely returns a list of pools, how pagination works, or what the sort options actually do. For a tool with 3 parameters, the description is too thin to be complete.

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 has 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema, and 'various metrics' hints at the sort parameter but fails to clarify the meaning of enum values like 'h24_volume_usd_desc' or 'h24_tx_count_desc'.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('top pools'), and scope ('on a specific network by various metrics'). It is specific enough to suggest what the tool does, but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like geckoterminal_trending_pools or geckoterminal_new_pools, which may also return 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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only mentions 'specific network', but does not explain when one would choose 'top pools' over 'trending pools' or 'new pools', nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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