defi_get_chain_tvl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only restates the function name without disclosing return format, time range, units, or any access constraints. This is a significant gap for a data-retrieval tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly conveys the core function. No wasted words or redundant 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool and complete parameter schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without an output schema or annotations, it could benefit from stating what the historical TVL data looks like (e.g., time series, units) to fully prepare the 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?

The schema fully describes the single 'chain' parameter with examples, so the description adds little beyond what is already structured. Baseline of 3 applies since schema coverage is 100% and the description does not introduce new parameter semantics.

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 gets historical TVL data for a specific blockchain, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like defi_get_chain_fees and defi_get_protocol_tvl by focusing on chain-level TVL.

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 usage context is implied: use this when chain-level historical TVL is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives such as defi_get_protocol_tvl or defi_get_token_price_history.

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