Get HoodGrow token DeFi detail

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

Adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations: data is read on-chain and snapshotted every 15 minutes, cost is $0.05 via x402 or free with API key, and it fails for unknown symbols. These details complement the readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint without contradiction.

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?

Three sentences each deliver distinct value: scope/unique value, cost/authentication, and behavior/freshness. No redundancy or fluff; the structure is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Without an output schema, the description clarifies the tool's output scope (Morpho markets, Uniswap pools, roles labeled, state snapshot) and gives a snapshot cadence. It does not enumerate exact fields, but for a single-parameter tool with strong annotations this is sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema already fully documents the single 'symbol' parameter with example and case-insensitivity, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context that the symbol refers to a token across DeFi markets, but does not add new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool enumerates all Morpho lending markets and Uniswap V3 pools for a token, explicitly distinguishing it from get_catalog/get_token by emphasizing the full DeFi picture rather than a single APY figure. It is specific about scope and resources, making sibling differentiation strong.

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 contrasts with get_catalog/get_token, implying it should be used when a comprehensive comparison of yield/borrow options is needed. It also mentions cost and failure on unknown symbols, but does not explicitly list when not to use it or provide alternative tool names for exclusions.

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