check_token

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

No annotations provided, yet description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., invalid mint address). The burden is on the description, and it is insufficient.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and key outputs. Could be slightly improved by structuring the return items, but overall efficient.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, description covers purpose and return fields but lacks specifics on response structure or error cases. Adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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% (mint_address described). Description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, which already explains 'Base58-encoded Solana token mint address.' 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?

Description explicitly states the tool checks the risk profile of a Solana token by mint address, lists returned items (risk score, flags, operator history, bundle detection), and distinguishes from siblings like check_operator and explain_risk through specific purpose.

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?

Provides clear direction to call before buying or listing any token, implying pre-trade due diligence. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with siblings, but the context is sufficient.

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