defi_get_stablecoin_chains

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states a high-level action without explaining what 'breakdown' includes (e.g., all chains, top N, time period, data source, units). The read-only nature is implied by 'Get' but not expanded upon.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler or redundant words. Every word is meaningful.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is adequate but minimal. There is no output schema or annotations, so the description should clarify the return structure more explicitly (e.g., a list of chains with market cap values). As written, it leaves the exact output format to the agent's inference, which is a moderate gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema already exhaustively documents the input side (empty object). The description adds context about the output nature (market cap breakdown by blockchain), which is useful given there is no output schema. Baseline for zero params is 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a precise resource ('stablecoin market cap breakdown by blockchain'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like defi_get_stablecoins or defi_get_stablecoin, which likely target individual stablecoins or lists of stablecoins, not chain-level breakdowns.

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 use when the agent needs stablecoin market cap data organized by blockchain, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor provide any exclusions. For example, it could mention that defi_get_stablecoins handles per-stablecoin details and defi_get_chains handles general chain TVL.

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