get_pricing

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only and idempotent, so the description's job is lighter. It adds context about what is returned (rates, wallet, instructions), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: purpose, contents, optional filtering. No redundant phrases. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description lists key output items (USDC rates, wallet/mint, free-tier limits, transaction instructions). It could mention response format, but given tool simplicity, it is sufficient.

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 100% with a clear description for the only parameter. The description simply restates the optional filtering. No additional meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description starts with 'Return current tool pricing and Solana payment details', clearly stating the verb and resource. It lists specific contents (USDC rates, wallet/mint, free-tier limits, transaction instructions) and mentions optional filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scan_token or verify_payment.

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 this tool should be used when pricing or payment details are needed, and mentions optional filtering. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the context is clear given sibling tools have different purposes.

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