pons_v1_launches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a scan of events, returns newest-first, lists the event fields, and notes the deployer filter is applied server-side via topic. Minor details like pagination or empty-result behavior are not mentioned, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The action and target resource are front-loaded, the field list is compact but informative, and the optional filter is stated after the core behavior. It does not restate schema details.

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?

For a query tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the key return fields, ordering, and filter behavior, while the schema covers all parameter semantics. It could be slightly more explicit about the return envelope or pagination, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description adds only the 'server-side topic' nuance for the deployer filter, which is useful but not a significant extension beyond the schema. 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 names the exact resource ('V1 legacy factory's TokenLaunched events'), distinguishes its generation ('Uniswap V3 generation'), specifies ordering ('newest-first'), and enumerates the returned fields. This clearly separates it from siblings like pons_recent_launches and pons_v1_get_token.

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 provides clear context by scoping to the V1 legacy factory and noting the optional deployer filter as a server-side topic. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use, but the V1-specific framing makes the intended use case reasonably clear.

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