create_withdraw_request

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'Create a withdrawal request' without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether it is destructive, requires approvals, or has rate limits. Minimal value added beyond the name.

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 is concise but lacks structure. It is not verbose, but could front-load critical info or provide a brief example. Adequate but not optimized.

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 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what happens after request creation, side effects, or typical workflow steps. Leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema fields like 'token', 'amount', 'address'. The parameter descriptions in schema are basic, but description does not provide additional context like formats or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'create' and resource 'withdrawal request', distinguishing it from siblings like create_internal_transfer or create_order. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools such as request_pnl_settlement, which could be a close alternative.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_internal_transfer or other withdrawal-related tools. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned, leaving the agent without context to decide appropriately.

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