Cross-Chain Portfolio

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds valuable context: includes USD valuations, DeFi positions (Aave V3), and returns total net worth, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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-loading key information: complete cross-chain overview, USD valuations, specific chains, DeFi positions, and return value. No redundant elements.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description clearly specifies it returns total net worth and includes token holdings and DeFi positions. With no parameters and readOnlyHint, the description provides sufficient guidance for an 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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100% vacuously. The description adds context about the tool's output (token holdings, DeFi, total net worth), which is helpful for understanding the tool's behavior.

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 it gets a complete cross-chain portfolio overview with USD valuations across four specific chains and includes DeFi positions, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_balance and get_aave_status.

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 explicitly states the tool provides a portfolio overview, implying use when needing aggregated holdings across chains. However, it does not explicitly exclude use cases or mention alternatives, though sibling differentiation is clear.

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