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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the result is a paginated list, APY is for the strategy's default range, and APY values are decimal fractions rather than percentages.

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?

Four sentences with no filler: purpose, featured-only recommendation, pagination behavior, APY format, and sibling routing. The core purpose is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with fully documented optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers everything needed to invoke it correctly: the resource, first-call recommendation, pagination, return-context, and the sibling for deeper detail. Nothing necessary is missing.

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% and every parameter already has a description and default, so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description adds operational guidance like 'featured_only=true ... recommended first call' and pagination tips, but does not materially redefine any parameter's meaning.

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?

States a specific action ('Get Arcadia LP strategies') and identifies the resource clearly. It also distinguishes itself from read_strategy_info by noting that the sibling provides full per-range detail, so an agent can correctly tell them apart.

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 recommends using featured_only=true for the first call and instructs the agent to increase limit or use offset for pagination. It also names read_strategy_info as the alternative when full APY-per-range detail is needed, making the when-to-use decision clear.

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