bridgeAssets

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that it auto-generates a deposit address and sends tokens, and that tokens become ETH on Katana. However, it omits details like permission requirements, reversibility, and error handling.

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 sentences pack essential actions and a note about bridging to ETH. Concise but could be more structured; front-loads the main action.

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 output format or return behavior. Since there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., transaction hash), but it only says to 'inform user'. Also unclear if synchronous.

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 three parameters (asset, chain, amount) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond naming supported chains implicitly, so 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 bridges tokens to Katana, generates a deposit address, and sends tokens from the wallet. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like swaps and vault deposits.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, chain specifics, or when not to bridge.

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