Plan a position from a human price range

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: read-only, reads decimals over RPC, returns aligned ticks and amounts, requires token0 < token1 by address, and does not compute optimal ratio. This provides comprehensive behavioral information.

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 concise and well-structured, starting with a clear label 'READ-ONLY helper' and providing all essential information in a few sentences without 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's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main purpose, inputs, outputs, and constraints. It could be slightly more complete by explaining what happens when amounts are omitted or mentioning the RPC requirement, but it is largely 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description bears the burden. It explains the meaning of priceLower, priceUpper as human price range, token0/token1 address constraint, and optional amount0/amount1. However, it does not describe fee or chainId explicitly beyond mentioning 'fee's tick spacing'.

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's function: a read-only helper that computes tick and amount parameters for a Uniswap V3 position from a human price range. It distinguishes itself from siblings like build_mint by noting it builds no transaction itself.

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 explicitly notes it is a 'READ-ONLY helper (builds no tx)' and 'ready to feed into build_mint', providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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