research_yield_opportunities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context about the data source (DefiLlama) and the ranked list output, but does not disclose sorting behavior, pagination, rate limits, or response size. With good annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every phrase contributes to understanding the tool's function and output.

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 moderate complexity (five optional params, no output schema), the description provides a reasonable summary of purpose, output fields, and data source. However, it lacks explicit guidance on ranking order or default limits, and does not mention related tools, so it is good but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so all five parameters (chain, limit, token, minTvl, protocol) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond mentioning that the output includes APY, TVL, chain, and protocol, so it provides minimal added semantics.

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 discovers DeFi yield farming and liquidity pool opportunities from DefiLlama's yields API, with a specific verb ('Discover') and resource. It also distinguishes itself by mentioning the filtered/ranked list with APY, TVL, chain, protocol, and pool metadata, setting it apart from broader market or research tools.

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 when a user wants yield farming or liquidity pool opportunities, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives like research_compare_yields. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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