Recent sales

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description adds value by specifying the returned fields (price, buyer, seller, tx signature) and the conditional OpenSea inclusion behavior. No contradiction with annotations; it provides operational context beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then detailing the conditional OpenSea behavior. No wasted words; each clause adds relevant information.

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 read-only nature and presence of annotations, the description covers the essential details: return fields, collection identifier formats, and the optional OpenSea integration. It does not mention error cases or pagination behavior, but the limit parameter in the schema covers count. The lack of an output schema makes the field list valuable; overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is only 33% (only limit has a description). The description compensates by explaining that collection accepts a registry id or Magic Eden symbol and that openseaSlug is used for OpenSea inclusion. It does not repeat limit's schema description but adds meaning for the other two 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 clearly states the tool returns the most recent completed sales for a collection, listing the included fields (price in SOL, buyer, seller, tx signature) and the accepted collection identifiers (registry id or Magic Eden symbol). This is specific and actionable, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling get_collection_sales, which may serve a similar function.

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 gives conditional guidance for including OpenSea sales (requires OPENSEA_API_KEY and openseaSlug) but does not state when to prefer this over other collection-related tools like get_collection_sales or find_listings. It implies usage for recent sales but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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