Lends Prepare Withdraw

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The word 'Construct' adds the useful implication that this builds a transaction rather than broadcasting a withdrawal, but the description does not disclose further behavior such as approval requirements or returned payload format.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It names the exact action and resource while remaining highly concise.

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?

Although the tool is simple and annotations cover safety, the description omits essential parameter semantics and does not state what the transaction object looks like or whether an approval step is required first. With no output schema and no parameter details, this is not enough for an agent to invoke it 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%, and the description does not explain what 'collateral' and 'amount' represent, what units amount uses, or how they relate to the withdrawal. The parameter names and regex patterns provide only weak inference, so the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb 'Construct' with a clearly scoped resource, 'a collateral withdrawal transaction', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like prepare_deposit, prepare_borrow, and prepare_repay. Its purpose is immediately identifiable without needing to inspect schemas.

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 description gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over related prepare tools, nor does it mention prerequisites such as prior collateral approval or checking withdrawable collateral. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and sibling context.

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