crypto_loan_adjust_ltv

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

No annotations provided. The description only says 'adjust' but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, error conditions, or any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. Minimal transparency.

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 short and somewhat structured but under-specified for the tool's complexity. It is concise but at the expense of completeness, leading to a merely adequate score.

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 schema description coverage and no output schema, the description should provide comprehensive context but does not. It omits return values, error behavior, prerequisites, and any operational details, leaving the agent without enough information to use the tool confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description adds basic meaning: order_id is loan order ID, amount is adjustment amount, direction is add/reduce. However, it does not specify format, constraints, or valid values beyond naming, offering only marginal improvement 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?

The description clearly states it adjusts collateral amount (LTV) for a crypto loan, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the similar sibling tool 'new_crypto_loan_adjust_ltv', lacking sibling distinction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'new_crypto_loan_adjust_ltv') or any prerequisites or context. The description provides no usage recommendations.

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