get_protocol_params

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only states 'latest' without clarifying data freshness, caching behavior, or what the governance parameters govern (e.g., fee structures, collateral ratios).

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?

Extremely brief at only four words with no waste, but verges on under-specification. Could benefit from one additional sentence clarifying the scope of 'governance parameters' without sacrificing clarity.

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?

Adequate for a simple read operation but leaves ambiguity about what specific governance parameters are returned (e.g., are these voting thresholds, fee parameters, or stability pool settings?) given the rich ecosystem of sibling tools handling CDPs, staking, and stability pools.

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?

Input schema contains zero parameters. Per evaluation guidelines, zero-parameter tools receive a baseline score of 4.

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?

States a clear verb (Get) and resource (governance protocol parameters), distinguishing it from sibling 'get_' tools that target specific assets or accounts. However, it doesn't clarify what distinguishes 'governance' parameters from other protocol parameters like those in get_protocol_stats.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_protocol_stats or get_staking_info, nor does it mention if this should be called before specific mutations.

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