research_quick_lookup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'quick lookup' and 'multiple sources.' It does not state whether the query is cached, which sources are consulted, whether it fails on unknown tokens, or what 'basic' information is included, leaving the agent uncertain about side effects and limitations.

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, front-loaded sentence that is easy to scan. It is concise but slightly underspecified; however, for a one-parameter tool, this length is efficient and earns its place.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source for understanding return values and behavior. It does not specify what fields the lookup returns, how sources are combined, or any caveats, leaving a critical gap for an agent to decide if this tool meets the user's need.

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 fully documents the single parameter tokenName with 'Token name or ticker' (100% coverage), so the description need not repeat it. The description adds no extra semantics about the parameter, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states it does a 'quick lookup of basic token information from multiple sources,' which names a verb and resource but remains vague about what constitutes 'basic token information.' It does not differentiate this from the many other token lookup tools like get_erc20_token_info, market_coingecko_contract, or defi_get_token_prices, so an agent cannot reliably distinguish it from siblings.

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 usage context is provided beyond the one-line purpose. There is no mention of when to prefer this tool over the alternative research_* or token-info tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites, so the agent receives no guidance for tool selection.

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