pons_curve_trades

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the merging of CurveBuy and CurveSell events, the newest-first sort, and the returned fields. It does not cover edge cases (empty results, invalid address) or explicitly state read-only behavior, but the event-query nature makes this low-risk.

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?

One dense sentence with no filler; every phrase adds information about either the event set, fields, or ordering.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description lists the returned union of fields and ordering. It could have been more explicit about return shape or the meaning of 'amounts', but the schema covers input parameters, and the description is sufficient for a simple read-only query.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the schema (curveAddress, limit, lookbackBlocks), so the description needn't re-explain them. It adds no new parameter-level detail, hence baseline 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 names the exact data: CurveBuy + CurveSell events for a single bonding curve, including the fields side, trader, recipient, amounts, fee, tax. It also specifies ordering ('newest-first'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like pons_quote_buy or pons_pair_token_economics.

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 phrase 'on one bonding curve' establishes the scope: use when you need trade-level buy/sell event history for a particular curve. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so it's clear context but no exclusions.

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