t2000_pending_rewards

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

No annotations provided, but description makes clear it's a read-only check ('without claiming'). Mentions output structure (per protocol and asset). Could note authentication or rate limits, but not essential for simple check.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Adequately describes purpose, usage, and expected output (claimable rewards per protocol/asset) with no parameters or output schema. Lacks details on output format but sufficient for a simple check.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters; description adds no param info because none exist. Schema coverage is 100% (trivially). No need to compensate.

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?

Clearly states 'Check pending protocol rewards... WITHOUT claiming them'. Specifies verb (check) and resource (pending rewards), and distinguishes from sibling t2000_claim_rewards.

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?

Explicitly directs to use t2000_claim_rewards for claiming, providing clear when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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