listEarnAutoSavings

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

Beyond readOnlyHint=true/openWorldHint=true, the description discloses two operational traits the annotations cannot: it requires Earn read permission and is rate-limited to 10 requests per second per UID. That is genuinely useful pre-invocation context; only return-shape/pagination detail is absent.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by parameter behavior and the permission/rate-limit note. Nothing is redundant and every sentence adds 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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, argument behavior, auth requirement, and throttling. The only gap is that it does not describe the response structure at all, though it hints at what is returned.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the coins parameter, and it does: omission returns all supported coins, and up to 50 coin names can filter. It could add the name format or filtering-match semantics, but the core meaning is delivered.

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 ('Query') and resource ('Flexible Saving auto savings settings and current APR by coin'), which is far more informative than the bare name. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling editEarnAutoSavings or other Earn reads, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage guidance is limited to the parameter level ('Omit `coins` to return all supported coins; specify up to 50 coin names to filter'). There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative guidance, such as pointing to editEarnAutoSavings for modifying settings, so usage is only implied.

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