leverage_cdp

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

Strong disclosure that it 'builds an unsigned transaction (CBOR hex) for client-side signing' — critical behavioral detail given no annotations exist. Explains the output format compensates for missing output schema. Could mention if ROB positions are consumed/locked in the process.

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 dense sentence with zero waste. Structure flows logically: action → mechanism → output format. Every clause provides distinct value (what, how, return type).

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 zero annotations and no output schema, the description appropriately explains the return value (CBOR hex). For a 4-parameter DeFi mutation, it covers the essential interaction model, though could note side effects on ROB positions.

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% (3/4 params described). Description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but schema adequately documents address, leverage, and baseCollateral. Asset enum is self-explanatory though undescribed.

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?

Excellent specificity: 'Open a leveraged CDP' distinguishes from sibling open_cdp, and 'by redeeming against ROB positions' clarifies the unique mechanism. Clearly identifies the resource (CDP) and action (open/leverage).

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 prerequisite context (requires ROB positions to redeem against) but lacks explicit when-to-use vs open_cdp or when-not-to-use guidance. No explicit alternatives named, though the mechanism hints at the specific use case.

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