Meteora Add D L M M Liquidity

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive, but the description adds no behavioral details beyond 'add liquidity.' No disclosure of side effects, prerequisites, or failure conditions.

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 concise, but the large SAP MCP block is verbose and not directly about the tool's functionality. It could be more focused and front-loaded.

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?

Missing return value information despite an output schema being available. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., pool existence, token approval) or potential errors, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 covers all 7 parameters with 100% description coverage, so the description does not need to add much. However, it does not explain bin IDs beyond what the schema provides, missing an opportunity to clarify price range semantics.

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 'Add liquidity to a Meteora DLMM pool with a distribution strategy,' specifying the action and resource. However, the inclusion of SAP MCP context may distract from the core purpose, slightly reducing clarity.

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 only usage guidance is about SAP tools, not when to use this tool versus sibling liquidity tools like meteora_createDLMMPool or meteora_removeDLMMLiquidity. No explicit context for selection criteria.

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