mtrkr_lp_positions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses exclusion of closed zero-value positions and the use of an indexer with automatic RPC fallback. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or mention data freshness or rate limits.

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 three sentences with clear front-loading: purpose, return details, and exclusions/technical behavior. Every sentence is informative and there is no unnecessary repetition.

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?

For a single-parameter data retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return data, exclusions, and technical fallback. It could mention if there are rate limits or permission requirements, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The input schema already fully describes the single parameter (address with pattern). The tool description adds context that the address is for a wallet to retrieve LP positions, but does not provide additional format constraints or usage details 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 it gets concentrated-liquidity LP positions for a wallet on Kumbaya DEX, and lists specific return data (token pairs, tick ranges, liquidity, fees, USD valuations). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the DEX and type of positions.

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 for retrieving active LP positions for a wallet, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like mtrkr_prism_positions or mtrkr_wallet_tokens. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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