haiku_discover_yields

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that results include APY, TVL, risk parameters, and token IIDs, and that the iid field is usable in haiku_get_quote. However, it does not mention rate limits, pagination behavior, or response size limits beyond the 'limit' parameter.

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?

Concise at three sentences. The first sentence states purpose, second lists outputs and downstream use, third provides examples. Every sentence adds value. Slightly verbose in the last sentence with multiple examples, but still efficient.

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 6 parameters with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description effectively explains the tool's purpose and output semantics. It could be improved by describing the risk parameters' nature (e.g., risk score vs. qualitative), but overall adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the iid field's downstream use and by including example questions. However, it does not add new meaning beyond the schema for most parameters, as the schema already has clear descriptions for each.

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 yield opportunities across DeFi protocols and lists specific output fields (APY, TVL, risk parameters, token IIDs). It distinguishes itself from siblings like haiku_get_quote by explaining the iid output can be used as input for that tool.

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 explicit example questions for when to use the tool, such as 'best lending yields on Arbitrum' or 'highest APY vaults with at least $1M TVL'. It also explains how the output connects to haiku_get_quote, guiding the agent on downstream usage.

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