get_morpho_positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds performance details (auto-discovery may take seconds) and explicitly states the return structure (supplied/borrowed assets and collateral). 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, front-loading the core purpose and then explaining usage modes. Every sentence is essential and well-structured.

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 adequately explains returns (per-market supplied/borrowed assets and collateral). It covers both usage modes and addresses complexity of the optional array parameter.

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%, yet the description adds significant meaning: explains marketIds as a fast path, auto-discovery behavior, and the bytes32 format (keccak256 of MarketParams). This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 fetches Morpho Blue positions for a wallet, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_compound_positions by naming Morpho Blue explicitly.

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 explains when to omit marketIds (auto-discovery) vs pass explicitly (fast path), and notes cold call latency. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like get_morpho_markets or other position tools.

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