market_get_protocol_tvl

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only/idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral detail by enumerating the return payload: current TVL in USD, 1d/7d/30d percentage changes, per-chain breakdown, category, and website URL.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then efficiently lists all return fields. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Tool is simple with one documented parameter and read-only annotations. The description lists key outputs, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke 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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter 'protocol' is well documented with examples. The description merely repeats 'DefiLlama slug' without adding new semantic details beyond the 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 action ('Fetch') and resource ('Total Value Locked for a specific DeFi protocol by its DefiLlama slug'). It distinguishes from siblings like market_get_top_protocols (which lists protocols) and market_get_chain_tvl (which fetches chain-level TVL).

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?

Provides clear context: use when you need TVL for a single protocol, identified by slug. Does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the sibling list and the word 'specific' imply differentiation.

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