defi_yield_radar

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure burden, and it does surface two useful facts: a payment cost (0.01 USDC on Base) and that outputs are pre-sanitized for agent execution. It omits whether the call is read-only, latency/rate-limit behavior, and the return shape, so it is only partially transparent.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core capability followed by the payment terms. Every clause carries information, though the pricing sentence sits slightly awkwardly alongside the data description.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description conveys the data domain and cost but does not describe the returned fields or ordering ('top' by what metric). Enough to call it, not enough to predict the response reliably.

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% and the single 'asset' parameter is fully documented in the schema, setting the baseline at 3. The description's mention of 'stablecoin and ETH' loosely corresponds to the asset options but adds no new format or default semantics beyond the schema.

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 names a specific resource (top stablecoin and ETH APY yields) with a specific scope (live, on Base), so the agent understands what data comes back. The verb is implicit rather than stated ('retrieve/list'), which keeps it short of a 5, but the noun phrase is unambiguous and no sibling overlaps this DeFi-yield niche.

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?

There is no when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The phrase 'pre-sanitized for autonomous AI agent execution' hints at the intended caller but does not tell the agent in which situations it should reach for this tool versus the many sibling tools.

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