x402_yield_estimate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It merely paraphrases the tool name and gives no details about assumptions, data sources, or return behavior. The lack of behavioral context (e.g., whether this is for x402-specific yield, uses current APY, or requires a wallet) is a significant gap.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though it sacrifices useful detail. No structural issues.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description alone is insufficient. An agent cannot tell what 'yield' refers to, what units the amount is in, how the estimate is calculated, or what the response will look like. The tool is simple on the surface but needs more context to avoid misuse.

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 already describes both parameters clearly with 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, but it also does not need to compensate for any gaps.

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 a specific verb ('estimate') and resource ('yield') along with a time period, making its core function understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from closely related siblings like x402_yield, x402_apy, or yield_projection, so it misses the differentiation needed for a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, exclusions, or relationships to other yield-related tools, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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