info

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses the types of information provided but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, whether it returns data in a specific format, or any side effects. The informational nature is implied but not formally stated.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Platform overview for vibecoin') and then efficiently lists its contents. Every part adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple, zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It lists what the overview covers, but some terms like 'config' and 'links' are slightly ambiguous. Overall, it adequately covers the tool's role in the broader context.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The schema has no properties, and the baseline score for zero-parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 defines the tool as a platform overview for vibecoin, listing distinct content areas (what it does, fee structure, config, wallets, links). This is a specific verb+resource ('platform overview') that differentiates it from the action-oriented sibling tools like launch and wallet.

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 the tool is for getting broad platform context, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of the sibling tools or provide any exclusions. Use case is inferred rather than prescribed.

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