HYPE staking

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds context: it's public data, no API key, and details what data is returned (active set, jailed excluded, etc.), which goes beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and efficiently provides context about why to use this tool vs liquid staking. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains what the tool returns (active set sorted by APR, commission, uptime, share of stake, jailed excluded). It contrasts with liquid staking yields. With good annotations and sibling differentiation, the description is fully adequate for a read-only list tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the two parameters, each with descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline is 3 due to high coverage. The description focuses on output context rather than parameter details.

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 is about staking HYPE directly with a validator, listing active set ranked by predicted APR with commission, uptime, share of stake, and naming jailed validators. It distinguishes from liquid staking wrappers via mention of hyperevm_yields, making the purpose specific and differentiated from siblings.

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 explicitly says this is the benchmark for liquid staking rates and those live in hyperevm_yields, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It also states it is read-only public data with no API key.

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