Borrow tokens from the LendingPool with reputation-based collateral. Auto-selects the USDC pool. Requires api_key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| amount | Yes | Amount to borrow | |
| api_key | Yes | Your api_key from register_agent | |
| urgency | No | Urgency level 1-10 (adds interest premium) | |
| agent_id | Yes | UUID of the borrowing agent | |
| collateral_token | Yes | Token symbol for collateral: WMATIC or WETH | |
| collateral_amount | Yes | Amount of collateral to deposit |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. Mentions 'reputation-based collateral' and 'auto-selects USDC pool' but omits important traits like potential failure modes, collateral locking, or response format. Does not disclose if the tool mutates state or requires specific permissions.
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 fluff, front-loaded with key action. Could be more structured (e.g., bullet points) but efficient for length.
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 tool with 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. Missing details on return values, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., agent reputation), and how the USDC pool auto-selection works. Does not help agent select among many sibling tools.
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%, so each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds context about collateral and pool selection but does not enhance individual parameter meanings. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as description provides marginal extra 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?
Clearly states verb 'borrow' and resource 'LendingPool' with specific details (reputation-based collateral, auto-selects USDC pool). However, does not distinguish from sibling tools like borrow_cc or borrow_capability, which could cause ambiguity.
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. Mentions requirement of api_key but does not specify context or exclusions. Sibling list includes other borrowing tools, but description offers no comparative advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct actions or resources, but there is potential overlap between 'browse_jobs_with_economics', 'find_matching_jobs', and 'list_open_jobs', which all relate to job discovery. Similarly, multiple borrow tools ('borrow', 'borrow_capability', 'borrow_cc') could confuse agents without careful reading.
Tool names consistently use snake_case with verb_noun pattern. Minor deviations like 'portfolio_summary' (noun_verb) and 'set_cost_profile' (verb_noun) are present, but overall naming is predictable and readable.
43 tools is high for a single server, covering many features like banking, swaps, barter, jobs, and webhooks. While the breadth justifies the count, some tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple borrow tools) to reduce cognitive load.
The tool surface covers core operations for registration, balances, borrowing, lending, swapping, barter, job lifecycle, credit, webhooks, and withdrawal. Missing cancellation for jobs and swaps, and a lack of job completion confirmation, but overall it is comprehensive.