earn_get_position_rewards_summary

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output fields and the optional parameter. However, it does not mention authentication details (jwt parameter is in schema but not described) or any error conditions. The [PRIVATE] tag hints at access restrictions but is not elaborated. For a read operation, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 three sentences plus a tag, all front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, return fields, prerequisite, and optional parameter. No fluff.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description correctly describes the return values. It covers the prerequisite and optional parameter. It lacks error details or further context, but for a simple summary tool with clear schema, it is sufficiently complete.

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% (all parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description adds context for position_id ('Use earn_get_positions first to get the position ID') and for user_currency ('Optional... default: EUR'), which slightly enhances the schema. However, no new semantic insights are provided beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 'Get rewards summary for a specific Earn position' and lists specific return fields (reward symbol, amount, converted amount). It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning 'specific position' and the prerequisite 'use earn_get_positions first'.

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 tells the agent to use earn_get_positions first to get the position ID. It implies the context for use, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or list alternatives. This is sufficient for a focused tool.

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