Drift Lend

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotence. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as token lock-up periods, interest accrual details, or approval requirements, which are relevant for an agent invoking the tool.

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 core purpose is stated in a single sentence. The additional SAP MCP sentence is secondary but not clearly separated. Overall concise, but could be more focused.

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 complexity (4 params, multiple siblings, output schema exists), the description lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details. While schema explains parameters and output schema covers returns, an agent needs more context to appropriately select and invoke this tool over similar ones.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description does not add meaning beyond schema, such as clarifying units or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the work.

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 ('Lend tokens on Drift') and outcome ('to earn interest'), which is a specific verb-resource pair. The tool name 'drift_lend' and sibling tools like 'drift_deposit' and 'drift_borrow' indicate distinct functions, but the description itself is unambiguous.

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 like drift_deposit or drift_borrow. The SAP MCP context mentions unrelated registration tools but does not help an agent decide between this and other DeFi actions.

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