Complete SAP Unstake

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

The description adds context that confirmation is needed before writes, implying side effects. Annotations do not provide behavioral details, so the description adds value but lacks specifics on state changes or authorization.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple parameter set and presence of output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's role in the SAP staking flow and distinguishes it from similar tools. Slightly more detail on prerequisites could be added, but it is sufficient.

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% with one parameter described. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 verb 'complete unstake' and the resource 'agent wallet', and distinguishes it from external AgentKit staking tools, making the purpose 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?

The description advises confirming agent wallet, amount, and timing before writes, and notes it is distinct from external tools. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not conditions beyond the sibling context.

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