drift_openPerpPosition

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without detailing side effects, authorization needs, failure modes, or transaction mechanics. The agent cannot infer safety or state changes (e.g., collateral locking, liquidation risks).

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 extremely concise (one sentence), which is efficient but under-specified. For a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, it lacks necessary detail. It is not front-loaded with critical information like leverage limits or order type implications.

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 (9 params, no annotations, no output schema), the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain return values, parameter relationships, or the overall effect (e.g., opening a position changes account state). The agent cannot use it effectively without external knowledge.

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 56%, meaning nearly half of parameters lack schema descriptions. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, failing to compensate for gaps. For example, 'reduceOnly' and 'subAccountId' have no context in either place.

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 verb 'Open' and the resource 'perpetual futures position' on the Drift protocol. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'drift_closePerpPosition' and 'drift_getPositions', which handle closing and viewing positions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, order types, or scenarios (e.g., market vs limit orders). The agent must infer usage from the schema, which is insufficient for effective selection.

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