getVASPList

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

Discloses that the returned list depends on the user's compliance zone (determined by UID), which is key behavioral context beyond the schema. No annotations were provided, so the description carries this burden well. Does not mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only query that is acceptable.

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?

Extremely concise with three bullet points. Each sentence adds value: purpose, use case, behavioral note, and a practical hint. No wasted words. Front-loaded with the main verb and resource.

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?

Despite having no parameters or output schema, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, when to use it, a key behavioral aspect (zone-dependence), and a specific usage hint. Nothing essential is missing for a tool of this simplicity.

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?

No parameters exist, so the baseline is 4. Description does not need to add parameter details. It efficiently conveys the tool's function without needing to explain inputs.

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?

Description clearly states the tool queries the list of available VASPs, specifies the use case (Travel Rule compliance for withdrawals), and adds context about compliance zone. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are mostly about trading and account management.

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 states when to use this tool (for Travel Rule compliance when withdrawing to exchanges) and provides a hint about using 'others' as vaspEntityId. However, does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but no direct alternatives exist among siblings.

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