get_flashloans

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a read operation. The description adds the constraint of v3+ protocols and mentions fee amounts, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or handling of empty results. The added context is moderate but not rich.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a critical constraint. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 has no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (flash loan events with fees) and the protocol constraint. It lacks detail on pagination or default behavior for 'first', but those are covered in schema. The description is sufficient for selection and basic invocation.

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%, meaning every parameter (first, network, protocol) already has a description in the input schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning about these parameters; it only describes the overall purpose. Baseline 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 tool returns 'Recent flashloan events including fee amounts', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling event tools like get_borrows or get_deposits by focusing on flash loans, and the constraint 'Only available for v3+ schema protocols' adds specificity.

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 clear context for when to use this tool by specifying the v3+ protocol limitation, which implicitly guides the agent away from older protocols. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the sibling set makes the purpose distinct.

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