dex_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing that it returns most-liquid pairs first, up to 30 per call from DexScreener, and specifies error handling ('On API failure returns {"error": "..."}'). Missing mentions of rate limits or auth, but overall transparent.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, usage condition, and then Args/Returns sections. It is appropriately detailed but could be slightly more concise; still, every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description lists all return fields. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return format thoroughly. For a search tool with two parameters, it is fully contextual and leaves no major 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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds rich meaning: query parameter is free-text with examples, and limit parameter explains it's after sorting by liquidity with range 1-30. This exceeds what the schema alone provides.

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 searches DEX pairs across all chains by token name, symbol, or address, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_price and get_token_dex_price by noting it returns DEX-side/on-chain prices and most-liquid pairs first.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: when the token is too new or small for CoinGecko (get_price returns empty) or when the user wants DEX-side/on-chain prices. This provides clear guidance and differentiation from sibling tools.

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