earn_get_positions

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that it lists only active positions, enumerates the returned fields, and emphasizes that positions are locked/yielding funds unlike Pockets. This goes beyond what annotations alone convey, with no contradiction.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then filter, output fields, and routing guidance. All sentences earn their place, though the [PRIVATE] tag is slightly cryptic and could be clearer.

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 simple read-only list operation with two optional parameters, the description covers the purpose, output fields, and sibling routing. Combined with full schema coverage and safety annotations, nothing critical is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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 schema already fully describes both parameters (jwt and position_id) with 100% coverage. The description merely restates the optional position_id filter without adding format or usage details, so it adds no significant meaning 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List active Earn positions/strategies') and clarifies the optional position_id filter. The description also distinguishes this tool from earn_get_assets and wallet_get_pockets, making its purpose unambiguous relative to siblings.

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?

Explicitly directs APY-related needs to earn_get_assets and contrasts Earn positions with liquid Pockets. It doesn't compare to every sibling such as earn_get_summary, but the provided routing and distinction give an agent sufficient context for selecting this tool.

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