scan_defi_yields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns APY, TVL, and pool data, and that data is updated in real-time from DeFiLlama. The verb 'Scan' implicitly indicates a read-only operation, and the return data description gives a clear behavioral picture. However, it does not explicitly state any limitations or side effects (e.g., rate limits, API dependencies), though for a scanning tool this is less critical.

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 three sentences, each contributing value: the first states the purpose, the second details the output data, and the third notes the data source and real-time nature. There is no redundant or filler content, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description covers what the tool does, what it returns, and the data source. Sibling tools are clearly different, and the schema documents the parameters, so the description is complete for an agent to select and use 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for both parameters (chain and min_tvl), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'Base chain' in the text, which aligns with the chain parameter default, but does not elaborate on min_tvl or provide usage details beyond what the schema already states.

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: 'Scan top DeFi yield opportunities across Base chain.' It uses a specific verb ('Scan') and resource ('DeFi yield opportunities'), and includes the chain scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scan_token_risk and check_wallet_exposure, which address different concerns.

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 implies usage context (finding yield opportunities on Base chain) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. However, the clear distinction from sibling tools (token risk, wallet exposure) gives the agent sufficient context to select this tool for yield scanning.

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