get_cdps_by_owner

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'Get all CDPs' implies a read-only query, and the accepted input forms are disclosed, but the description does not explicitly state that no state is changed, nor does it describe output shape, error behavior, or any rate/authorization constraints.

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 that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the key input format constraint in a parenthetical. There is no wasted wording.

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?

For a single-parameter getter, the description covers the input and purpose adequately. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves the return shape and safety profile implicit, and it does not clarify how this tool relates to get_cdps_by_address or get_all_cdps.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the owner parameter with 100% coverage, including both accepted formats. The description essentially restates the schema rather than adding new semantic detail, which meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 identifies a specific verb ('Get'), a resource ('all CDPs'), and a filtering scope ('for a specific owner'). It is unambiguous about what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool get_cdps_by_address, which could overlap since 'owner' accepts a bech32 address.

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 phrase 'for a specific owner' implies when to use this tool, but the description gives no explicit guidance about alternatives such as get_all_cdps or get_cdps_by_address. There are no when-not-to-use conditions or exclusions.

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