compare_yields

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: searches across all Solana DEXs, compares APRs, and automatically filters out scam pools. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or what happens when no pools are found.

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 appropriately sized with three main sentences plus parameter explanations. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, though the Args section formatting could be slightly cleaner. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 2-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic operation well but has gaps. It explains what the tool does and parameters but doesn't describe return format, error cases, or performance characteristics. Given the complexity of DeFi yield comparison, more context would be helpful.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining both parameters. It clarifies that 'token' accepts either symbol or mint address with examples, and 'limit' is maximum total pools with default value. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema.

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 with specific verbs ('Sucht', 'vergleicht', 'Filtert') and resources ('Token', 'Pools', 'APRs'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on cross-DEX yield comparison rather than safety checks, general info, prices, or wallet operations.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (comparing yields across Solana DEXs for a specific token). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like 'get_defi_yields' among siblings, which might offer different yield-related functionality.

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