Indexer: Stargate NFT holders by period

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that each element corresponds to an interval at the selected granularity, which clarifies the output structure.

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, no wasted words. The main purpose and key options are stated upfront.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and the input options. No gaps.

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% and the parameter description matches the schema. The tool description lists the allowed period values (DAY, WEEK, MONTH, YEAR, ALL), which are not in the schema as enums, thus adding semantic value.

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 explicitly states it returns a time-series of total Stargate NFT holders by period, listing the allowed granularities (DAY, WEEK, MONTH, YEAR, ALL). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like getStargateNftHoldersTotal (single total) and getStargateNftHoldersHistoric (raw historic data).

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 mentions the available periods and that the output is a time-series. It implies usage for aggregated trends over time but does not explicitly contrast with siblings or state when-not-to-use.

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