create_universal_transfer

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full burden. It only mentions auto-generation of transfer_id, but fails to disclose side effects, authorization needs, idempotency, or what happens on duplicate transfer_id. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Description is front-loaded with a clear one-sentence purpose, followed by a parameter list. The list is somewhat redundant with the schema, but overall efficient and not verbose.

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?

No output schema, complex tool with 7 parameters and many siblings. Description lacks crucial context: return value, error behavior, prerequisites (e.g., permissions), supported coin list, or differences from similar tools. Incomplete for reliable invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, description must compensate. It restates parameter names with minimal descriptions (e.g., 'Coin to transfer'), but does not specify valid values, formats (e.g., amount string), or account type options. Adds marginal value over the schema.

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 clearly states 'Create a universal transfer (between sub UIDs or master-sub)' which defines the action and resource, distinguishing it from other transfer tools like create_internal_transfer.

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 scope ('between sub UIDs or master-sub') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like create_internal_transfer, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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