get_staking_yields

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior. The description adds the context that it compares yields, which is useful but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like data freshness or retrieval method.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and resource, followed by the comparison feature. No redundant 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and the included protocols but misses telling the agent that the 'protocols' parameter can be used to filter, and does not hint at the output format (e.g., list of APY values) since no output schema exists.

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 input schema has one parameter ('protocols') with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention the parameter at all, leaving the agent unaware that it can filter by protocols or that a default list exists.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resources ('staking APY from Lido Finance, Binance Simple Earn, Cosmos validators, and Ethereum Beacon Chain'). It distinguishes from siblings by listing explicit protocols and the comparison function.

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 for comparing yield opportunities across staking protocols but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other data retrieval tools.

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