new_pairs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a paid service (returns 402 if unpaid) and requires a funded wallet on Base. It also mentions the return includes block and approx age. Missing details like rate limits or error handling, but this is adequate disclosure for a paid tool.

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?

Description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. It compresses parameters, return fields, use-case advice, and payment info into a few sentences. While efficient, it is slightly dense and could be structured more clearly. No wasted words.

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 the absence of output schema and annotations, the description explains the data source, DEXes, token details, use case, bundling suggestion, and payment requirement. It covers most essential context for an agent to decide to use the tool, though it lacks explicit error scenarios or exact JSON structure.

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%, so all parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description simply lists the parameters without adding extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, thus minimal added value. Baseline of 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 clearly states it returns recently-created Base DEX pairs from a background log-watcher for trading agents/snipers. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like token_safety or whale_swaps, which serve different purposes.

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?

Description explicitly suggests bundling with /v1/token-safety for rug/honeypot checks, indicating a common use case. It implies usage for fresh token launches, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative tools beyond the bundle suggestion.

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