get_lido_stats

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only fetch of current statistics, which is clear. However, it does not specify if data is real-time or cached, or any potential limitations, but for a simple getter with no parameters, this is acceptable.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and key outputs. Every word adds value, with no redundancy. It is concise and well-structured.

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 all expected return fields (total pooled ETH, shares, holders, fee structure, withdrawal queue status). For a zero-parameter tool with a simple purpose, this provides sufficient context. The sibling tools cover specialized queries, so this summary tool is complete as is.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information because none exist. This is appropriate as the schema coverage is 100%.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's action ('Get current Lido protocol statistics') and enumerates specific data points (total pooled ETH, shares, holders, fee structure, withdrawal queue). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on specific aspects (e.g., get_staking_apr, get_node_operators), providing a clear purpose.

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 explicit usage guidance is provided, such as when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_staking_apr or get_node_operators. The context implies this is a general overview, but an explicit recommendation would improve clarity.

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