yieldprobe: DeFi intel for agents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the cost (free) and the specific types of information included. It does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or any side effects, but for an info-gathering tool this is implied and not a major gap. It also omits any mention of return format, but given the absence of an output schema, the description provides adequate transparency for the agent.

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 a single, information-dense sentence. It front-loads the key facts ('Free') and then lists the content areas and the usage guidance. Every word earns its place, and it is highly efficient.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it contains, and when to use it. There is nothing else an agent needs to know to decide whether to invoke it. The absence of return details is acceptable given the simple nature of the tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. It correctly adds no irrelevant parameter information.

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's purpose: it provides service information (prices, payment network, HTTP endpoints, and how to pay). This distinguishes it from the sibling tools which focus on specific financial data like yields, movers, stablecoin peg, and token security. No confusion with alternatives.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to call this first when uncertain, which is a direct usage guideline. It implies this tool is a prerequisite or fallback for orientation, though it doesn't list exclusions. Still, the guidance is actionable and clear.

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