defi_pool_stats

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

No annotations provided. The description discloses pricing ($0.03/call) and free tier limits (50/50 today), which is helpful. However, it does not state that the tool is read-only or describe any side effects.

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 very short and front-loaded with the category and purpose. It efficiently includes cost and API info, but omits a clear verb (e.g., 'get' or 'retrieve').

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 tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and pricing. However, it does not explain what type of statistics are returned, leaving some context incomplete.

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% with one parameter (poolAddress) described as '池地址'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so 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?

The description states '流动性池统计' (liquidity pool statistics), clearly indicating it provides statistics for a DeFi liquidity pool. It distinguishes from siblings like defi_insights by focusing on individual pool stats.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or context for using pool statistics among many DeFi-related sibling tools.

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