get_kamino_positions

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.), the description details return structure (obligation PDA, per-reserve deposits/borrows, USD values, health factor with convention explanation), and clarifies edge cases (empty list for new wallets, warnings for pause/freeze). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Description is a single paragraph but front-loaded with 'READ-ONLY' and efficiently covers all key points without redundancy. Slightly dense but earns each sentence.

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 no output schema, the description thoroughly explains what the tool returns, including health factor conventions, empty list handling, and warnings, making it fully contextual for an AI 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter description, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds some extra context (health factor and warnings) but does not significantly enhance parameter semantics 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 explicitly states it enumerates a Solana wallet's Kamino lending position on the main market, specifying both the resource (Kamino) and context (main market), which clearly distinguishes it from other position tools like get_marginfi_positions or get_compound_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 indicates when it returns empty (wallet never used Kamino), providing implicit guidance on when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, though the naming and context naturally differentiate it.

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