drift_lend

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It fails to mention any details about lock periods, interest rate mechanics, risks, or whether the lent tokens can be withdrawn immediately.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it is too short to convey necessary information. It could benefit from a second sentence clarifying usage or key constraints.

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 absence of an output schema and the presence of four parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens after lending, how to check positions, or any associated costs or risks.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. While the schema already describes 3 of 4 parameters (75% coverage), the description does not explain how these parameters relate to the lending action, such as the role of 'subAccountId' or the interpretation of 'amount'.

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 'lend' and identifies the platform 'Drift' and the outcome 'earn interest.' However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'drift_deposit', which could be confused with lending, leaving ambiguity.

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 guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'drift_borrow' or 'drift_deposit'. There are no prerequisites, context, or conditions for usage.

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