get_token_supply_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only lists output fields and does not mention read-only nature, network support, default network behavior, or response shape. Key behavioral context like the BSC default and multi-network support is left to the 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 clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns its place but is minimal and could have included additional high-value details without becoming verbose.

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 output schema, the description must explain return values, but it only names three fields and says 'comprehensive,' leaving the full response shape ambiguous. It also omits important context like network defaults and supported chains, making the tool under-specified for an agent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters and the network default. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond the output fields, which maps to the tool's purpose but not to the input parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('token supply information'), and clearly lists the key data returned (total supply, burned, circulating). This distinguishes it from generic token info tools like get_erc20_token_info and chain-specific supply tools like sui_get_total_supply.

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 when token supply metrics are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. No guidance is given for choosing between this and similar token-related tools in the sibling list.

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