evmscope

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It adds critical behavioral constraints not in the schema: the result set is limited to 'top 10 pools by TVL' and the data source is DefiLlama. However, it omits explicit read-only confirmation, rate limiting, or authentication requirements.

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 compact single-sentence structure with parenthetical elaboration. Every clause earns its place: main action, data source, filter types, and result scope. No redundancy or wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description adequately compensates by specifying the result structure (top 10 pools) and data source. With 3 optional parameters fully documented in schema, the description provides sufficient context for invocation, though explicit return value format hints could strengthen it further.

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%, establishing baseline 3. The description aggregates the filtering intent ('프로토콜/체인별 필터') but does not add parameter-specific syntax, valid enum values, or formatting details beyond what the schema already documents.

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 states a specific verb (조회합니다/retrieves) and resource (DeFi yield rates/APY), specifies the data source (DefiLlama-based), and clearly distinguishes from siblings like getProtocolTVL (which returns TVL metrics) by explicitly targeting '수익률(APY)'.

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 mentions available filters (protocol/chain-specific) and TVL criteria, providing implied usage context for when to apply this tool. However, it lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance or named alternatives (e.g., 'use getProtocolTVL for total value locked instead of yields').

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