estimate_lending_energy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description adds crucial behavioral details: it tries on-chain simulation first, falls back to historical values, provides a per-step breakdown, and automatically checks allowance for supply/repay. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 relatively long but well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, though a few details (e.g., 'Covers ALL operations...') could be implied. Overall, it balances completeness with readability.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (per-step breakdown, total energy, bandwidth, TRX cost) and covers edge cases like fallback and allowance checks. It leaves no significant gaps for an agent to make mistakes.

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?

All 6 parameters are documented in the schema, but the description adds extra context: default values for amount ('1'), address (configured wallet), network (mainnet), and notes that spender is only used for 'approve'. It clarifies which operations don't need amount, adding significant value.

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 estimates energy, bandwidth, and TRX cost for any JustLend operation before execution. It lists all 9 operations (supply, withdraw, etc.) and explicitly contrasts with execution tools by saying 'BEFORE executing it', distinguishing from sibling tools like supply or borrow.

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 says to use this tool 'whenever the user asks about gas/energy/cost for any lending operation'. It provides context on fallback behavior and automatic allowance checks for supply/repay. It does not explicitly list when not to use, but the broad coverage and clear purpose make it unambiguous.

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