hl_user_dex_abstraction

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

The description does not disclose the behavior beyond naming the state. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't mention read-only nature, authorization needs, or what data is returned.

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 very short and front-loaded, but under-specification is not the same as conciseness. It does not use the space to add meaningful structure or key information.

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?

With a single parameter and no annotations, this simple state query tool could be fully described in one sentence. The current description fails to specify what the tool actually does or what the user parameter represents, making it incomplete for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'user' parameter. The parenthetical 'userDexAbstraction' hints at per-user state but adds no details about value format or purpose.

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 names a specific resource ('HIP-3 dex abstraction state') and adds the parenthetical '(userDexAbstraction)' which helps identify the tool. However, it lacks a verb (get/fetch/retrieve) and remains vague about what the state contains, so it only partially clarifies purpose.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative state query tools like hl_user_abstraction. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context cues.

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