withdraw_aave

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

No annotations exist. The description indicates it's a withdrawal (mutation) but omits details about side effects, error handling, or prerequisites like approvals. More context would be helpful for a DeFi action.

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?

One sentence, direct and efficient. No extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose.

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 and simple nature, the description covers the core action. However, it lacks details on return values (e.g., transaction hash) and potential risks, which are minor gaps for a straightforward withdrawal.

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%, so parameters are already described. The description adds value by specifying the 'max' usage for amount and linking asset to 'previously supplied asset', enhancing clarity beyond the schema.

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 'Withdraws a previously supplied asset from Aave V3', specifying the verb, resource, and protocol. This distinguishes it from siblings like withdraw_compound and deposit_aave.

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 explains how to use the 'max' keyword for full withdrawal. It implies usage context via the tool name (Aave-specific), but lacks explicit when/not and alternatives.

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