t2000_save

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool deposits assets to earn yield, allows preview via dryRun, and the 'all' behavior for entire balance. It does not mention authorization or rate limits, but covers key behavioral aspects.

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: first states purpose, second gives parameter details. Concise, front-loaded, no wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but the description covers input parameters well. It lacks explanation of return values (e.g., transaction receipt), but for a deposit action, the input focus is adequate. Could add what user gets back.

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 100% description coverage, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining asset defaults, 'all' string constant for amount, and dryRun preview behavior, enhancing understanding beyond 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 'Deposit USDC or USDsui into NAVI lending to earn yield.' It uses a specific verb (deposit) and resource (USDC/USDsui into NAVI lending), distinguishing it from siblings like borrow, repay, send, etc.

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 provides explicit usage tips: passing asset parameter with default, using 'all' for balance, and dryRun for preview. It implies when to use the tool (to deposit into lending) but does not explicitly exclude usage or compare to alternatives.

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