prepare_aave_supply

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

The description explains the bundling of approval and supply transactions, noting that both must be signed. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true) and does not contradict them.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and efficient. No wasted words.

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?

Covers the bundling behavior and signing requirement. Lacks explanation of return structure beyond `.next` and does not mention the 'max' keyword for amount (though present in schema). Still adequate for a transactional tool.

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?

Only 2 of 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema (amount and approvalCap), and the description does not explain any parameters further. With 40% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving wallet, asset, and chain unexplained.

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 builds an unsigned Aave V3 supply transaction and explains the approval bundling behavior. It distinguishes from sibling tools like prepare_aave_borrow by specifying 'supply' and mentions Aave V3.

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 use for supplying assets to Aave V3 and handles approval automatically. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the name and context make it clear.

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