fassets_liquidation_scanner

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

No annotations are provided. The description mentions premium/x402 payment but does not disclose behavioral traits like data freshness, rate limits, side effects, or authentication requirements beyond the payment condition.

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 efficiently written in two sentences, conveying the core purpose and the free condition. The placement of 'PREMIUM (x402)' slightly disrupts flow but is minor.

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 tool's complexity (scanner, premium, multiple parameters) and lack of output schema, the description omits details on return format, ordering, pagination, and risk interpretation. It covers core metrics but not full context.

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 only 25% (only x402_payment has a description). The description does not elaborate on asset, network, or max_agents parameters, leaving ambiguity despite the enums for asset and network.

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 scans liquidation risk for FAssets agents, ranks them, and lists specific per-agent metrics. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fassets_agent_status by focusing on liquidation risk and live prices.

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 when it is free (x402 not enabled) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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