get_moolah_pending_liquidations

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context by defining riskLevel > 1.0 as liquidatable and suggesting minRiskLevel=0.9 for near-threshold positions, which aids agent understanding of output semantics.

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 consists of two concise sentences without extraneous information. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence contributes essential meaning, achieving high efficiency.

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 has 7 optional parameters, no output schema, and annotations cover safety, the description adequately explains the core concept and usage. It lacks explicit mention of return format or pagination behavior, but this is not critical for a read-only list tool.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining the riskLevel concept and how minRiskLevel relates to liquidation threshold, providing an example value. Other parameters like page and network are already documented in 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 the tool lists Moolah positions eligible or approaching liquidation, using specific verb 'list' and resource 'positions'. It distinguishes from siblings like liquidation records or quotes by focusing on pending positions, and explains the riskLevel threshold.

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 implies usage to find liquidatable or near-liquidatable positions and provides an example (minRiskLevel=0.9). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it with alternatives like get_moolah_liquidation_records or moolah_liquidate.

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