get_staking_rewards

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

Annotations already declare it read-only and idempotent. The description adds valuable context: the estimate uses current APR as a proxy and is not an on-chain query, which is additional behavioral detail beyond 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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and parameters, second clarifies limitation. Front-loaded and every sentence is meaningful.

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 simple estimation tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could be improved by hinting at the output format, but the core functionality is well-covered.

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% description coverage for both parameters (wallet and period). The description repeats the period options but does not add new semantic information 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 clearly states the tool estimates staking rewards for a given period using current APR, and explicitly distinguishes itself as an estimate, not an on-chain query. This differentiates it from siblings like 'get_staking_positions' and 'estimate_staking_yield'.

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 to use the tool (for quick estimates using APR proxy) and what it does not do (not on-chain query). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for on-chain queries.

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