psm_swap_to_usdd

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral transparency burden. It merely states the swap action without disclosing side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or reversibility. This is minimal disclosure for a mutation operation.

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 with a single front-loaded sentence. While efficient, it could add context (e.g., clarifying 'gem' or listing network options) without losing conciseness, earning a high but not top score.

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?

Without an output schema and with sparse annotations, the description must provide complete operational context. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, preconditions, and the full meaning of parameters, making it insufficient for reliable agent usage.

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 input schema has 33% description coverage (only 'network' has a description). The description adds no parameter-level meaning, leaving 'market' and 'amount' unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the schema's low coverage.

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 the tool swaps gem collateral into USDD via the PSM. It uses a specific verb ('Swap') and resource ('gem collateral into USDD'), and distinguishes well from the sibling tool 'psm_swap_from_usdd' which performs the reverse direction.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'psm_swap_from_usdd' or 'mint_usdd'. The description implies use when converting gem collateral to USDD, but fails to provide when-not scenarios or prerequisites, leaving the agent to rely solely on tool names.

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