freeze_cdp

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

With no annotations provided, description carries full burden and successfully discloses critical behavioral trait: it builds an unsigned CBOR hex transaction for client-side signing rather than executing on-chain. This informs the agent that the tool is non-destructive and returns data requiring external signing. Minor gap: doesn't specify which operations are blocked during freeze or error conditions.

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?

Single sentence efficiently front-loads the purpose ('Freeze a CDP') and uses an em-dash to append the mechanism detail. No redundant words; every clause provides distinct value (purpose, effect, return format).

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 no output schema, description adequately compensates by specifying the return format (CBOR hex for client-side signing). Missing minor details: specific prerequisites (ownership), exact scope of frozen operations, or whether an 'unfreeze' tool exists among siblings.

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 75% with clear descriptions for address, cdpTxHash, and cdpOutputIndex; the asset enum is self-documenting. Description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but given high schema coverage, baseline adequacy is acceptable without additional compensation.

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 provides specific verb 'Freeze', resource 'CDP', and scope 'prevent further operations until unfrozen', clearly distinguishing from sibling operations like burn, close, or liquidate. It also identifies the mechanism ('builds an unsigned transaction'), which differentiates it from direct execution 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?

Implies usage context ('prevent further operations until unfrozen') suggesting temporary suspension, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like close_cdp or adjust_cdp. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., ownership requirements) or how to unfreeze.

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