loan_get_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return structure (two arrays with specific fields) and marks the tool as [PUBLIC]. No side effects or destructive actions are mentioned, which is appropriate for a read-only query.

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 concise, using three sentences to convey the purpose, return structure, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the main action and efficiently delivers all necessary information.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns, why it should be used, and its context relative to loan creation.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description's role is to explain the output, which it does thoroughly. Schema coverage is 100% (no params), and the description adds meaning by detailing the returned arrays and their fields.

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 it retrieves currency configuration for loans, specifying the two arrays (guarantee_currencies and loan_currencies) and their contents. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like loan_create by explicitly noting its preparatory role.

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 provides clear guidance: use guarantee currencies as collateral to receive loan currencies, and use this tool before creating a loan to understand options and limits. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use alternatives, the context is sufficient.

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