styx_pools

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well by disclosing exactly what is listed: two named pools, their sat caps, supported token pairs, and the shared 10,000 sat minimum. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but for a read-only listing this is largely sufficient.

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 front-loaded with the action and key pool facts in two tight sentences. The final tip is short and adds a clear next step without diluting the core listing purpose.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, and the description compensates by summarizing the pool list, caps, tokens, and minimum deposit. It does not spell out the full return shape or guarantee that all configuration fields are returned, but it gives an agent enough to decide whether to call it.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description does not confuse this with any hidden inputs.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List all available Styx pools with their configurations') and immediately names the concrete pools and their contents. An agent can distinguish this from styx_pool_status or styx_deposit without inspecting schemas.

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?

Usage is implied by the pool configuration and minimum-deposit details, which suggest calling this before depositing. The only explicit routing is a tip to call earning_opportunities afterward, with no stated when-not-to-use or direct comparison to styx_pool_status or styx_status.

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