prepare_compound_withdraw

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, which align with building an unsigned withdraw transaction. The description adds that it builds an unsigned transaction (not executing), and the 'max' tip. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second gives a specific usage instruction. No redundant words, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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 prepare tool with well-documented parameters, the description is adequate. It could optionally mention the output (unsigned transaction) or prerequisites (market address), but given the annotations and schema, it is complete enough.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds the 'amount: max' usage hint, which is helpful but already present in the parameter description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 builds an unsigned Compound V3 withdraw transaction, with a specific verb 'Build' and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like prepare_compound_supply by specifying 'withdraw'. The title annotation confirms.

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 gives clear context: used for Compound V3 withdrawals, with a special tip for 'max' amount. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to select appropriately among the many prepare tools.

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