get_token_info

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, data freshness, authentication needs, or rate limits. The agent is left unaware of any important behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Could benefit from slightly more structure but is appropriately concise.

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 read tool with 2 parameters, the description is fairly complete but lacks detail on the return format or what specific metadata is provided. No output schema exists to fill the gap.

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 description coverage is 100% with both parameters having descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'by its mint address', which maps to the mint_address parameter. No additional context for the network parameter.

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 states the tool gets metadata and supply info for an SPL token by its mint address. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_token_supply or get_token_balance.

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 usage when needing token info, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_token_supply or get_token_balance. No when-not-to-use or alternative references are provided.

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