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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a non-obvious behavioral trait: freshness-gating, where outdated rows are withheld and the response says 'stale' rather than serving stale data. It also explains the meaning of stockCollateral, adding context beyond obvious read behavior.

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, each dense with useful information. The first defines scope and data, the second explains an important behavioral constraint. No filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, key data fields, unique feature, and freshness behavior. With a single optional parameter and no output schema, this is more than sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already covers 100% of the parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds meaningful domain context by explaining that stockCollateral refers to registered tokenized equity, i.e., leverage against real stock, which is unique to this chain. This goes beyond the schema's phrasing.

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 returns Morpho lending markets on Robinhood Chain with specific data fields (supply/borrow USD, utilization, APYs) and highlights the unique stockCollateral feature. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which mention lending markets.

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 provides strong context for when to use this tool (when needing lending market data) and implicitly signals its unique value via stockCollateral. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the domain context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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