vaultpilot-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only partially discloses behavior. It states what data is returned (collateral, debt, health metrics) but doesn't mention authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation (though 'fetch' implies read).

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose, scope, and return data. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information. Perfectly sized for the tool's complexity.

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 read operation with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose and return data but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, error handling, and doesn't fully explain the 'chains' parameter's enum options beyond those mentioned.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description provides meaningful context for both parameters: 'wallet' is for fetching positions, and 'chains' specifies networks (though the schema includes more options than mentioned). The description adds value beyond the bare 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 clearly states the specific action ('Fetch all Aave V3 lending/borrowing positions'), target resource ('for a wallet'), and scope ('across Ethereum and Arbitrum'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_compound_positions' and 'get_morpho_positions' by specifying Aave V3 protocol.

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 usage for Aave V3 positions on specific chains, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_portfolio_summary' or 'get_health_alerts'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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