Adrena Remove Collateral

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no extra behavioral details beyond 'Remove collateral,' missing info on side effects, reversibility, or permissions. It does not contradict annotations.

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 first sentence is concise, but the second sentence is a lengthy, tangential context about SAP tools, which adds noise and reduces conciseness. The description is adequately sized but not optimally structured.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally complete. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., position existence, wallet ownership), return value hints, and behavioral safeguards beyond what annotations provide.

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 100% for the three parameters. The description lists the parameter names but adds no semantic value beyond the schema—e.g., no explanation of 'raw token amount' or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's action: 'Remove collateral from an Adrena position.' This is specific verb+resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like adrena_addCollateral and adrena_closePosition.

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 includes a lengthy paragraph about SAP MCP context and names alternative tools, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks exclusions or contextual cues for the agent.

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