Withdraw Asset From A Sui Vault

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

With empty annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('withdraw') without disclosing side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to the vault. This is too minimal for a mutating operation.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action and resource. However, the phrase 'certain USD-equivalent asset' is slightly vague and could be more specific, so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

With 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief to provide necessary context. It does not explain when to use amountUsd vs amountNative, what requestId is (beyond schema), or what the response contains. This is inadequate for a withdrawal tool with multiple optional parameters.

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 the schema fully documents each parameter. The description adds no additional parameter-level guidance beyond the schema, not even clarifying the relationship between amountUsd and amountNative. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('withdraw'), identifies the resource ('vault'), and scopes it to Sui/SUI-chain, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like solana-withdraw-from-vault and evm-withdraw-from-vault. The mention of 'USD-equivalent asset' further clarifies the asset type.

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 Sui-chain vault withdrawals, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., using solana-withdraw-from-vault for Solana), so it misses the 'explicit when/when-not' level.

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