get_v4_user_positions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only, cross-chain, and requires no API key. It does not mention rate limits or error handling, but the single-parameter input and output field listing offer sufficient transparency for a retrieval 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?

Two succinct sentences convey purpose, outputs, cross-chain behavior, and authentication requirements with no fluff. Every word 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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists key return fields (health factor, collateral, debt, etc.) and mentions cross-chain inclusion. It provides a solid overview, though it could clarify whether results are aggregated or per-spoke. Given the tool's simplicity, it is sufficiently complete.

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%, and the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema—confirming 'userAddress' is an EVM wallet and that results span all spokes. This is adequate but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 retrieves a user's Aave V4 positions across all spokes, listing specific fields like health factor, collateral, debt, borrowing power, and net APY. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing cross-chain scope and the list of outputs.

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 useful context: 'Cross-chain by default' and 'No API key needed.' However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus similar siblings like get_v4_user_summary or get_aave_user_position, which would improve decision-making.

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