addresses_listProtocols

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. Only states it lists data; does not mention whether it's read-only, if pagination exists, or response shape. Basic transparency but insufficient detail.

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?

Single sentence with no repetition or filler. Front-loaded purpose. Every word earns its place.

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 simplicity (1 required param, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains what the tool does and the needed input. Could mention return format but not necessary.

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% with a clear description of the 'chain' parameter. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states 'List all known DeFi protocols and their addresses' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like addresses_getProtocol and addresses_listTokens.

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?

Implies usage for listing all protocols on a chain but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like addresses_getProtocol. Lacks exclusions or when-not advice.

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