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

The description discloses that the call is paid ($0.03 per call via x402) and explains the APY unit. It also mentions the return includes data-driven reasons and risk flags. However, it lacks details on limitations like no results cases, rate limits, or auth requirements.

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 concise, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and includes useful examples and unit clarification without extraneous information.

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 the tool's complexity as a flagship with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, usage, cost, and return characteristics comprehensively. It effectively compensates for the lack of output schema and sibling differentiation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it returns a ranked top-N recommendation for stablecoin yield, with specific risk flags and data-driven reasons. Example prompts like 'Where should I park my stablecoins right now?' and 'best place for my USDC' show the exact verb+resource, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools as the flagship yield advisor.

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 gives explicit usage scenarios via example prompts, but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives. However, the context signals show distinct sibling tools, so the implied usage is clear.

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