prepare_compound_borrow

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

Even with annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description adds context: unsigned transaction (not broadcast), Ledger signing, how borrow is encoded, no approval step. No contradictions with 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?

Packs essential info in a front-loaded paragraph without redundancy. Every sentence adds value: operation, mechanics, precondition, certification, output type.

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 all necessary context: output is handle+preview, refers to sibling tool for collateral check, explains no approval. Could be slightly more detailed on output format but sufficient.

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?

100% schema coverage with descriptions. The description adds clarity: amount is human-readable (not raw), base token resolved on-chain, market address usage, chain defaults. Example provided.

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 'Build an unsigned Compound V3 borrow transaction' with specific verb (prepare/borrow) and resource. It explains the mechanics (withdraw beyond balance) and distinguishes from sibling tools like prepare_compound_supply.

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?

Provides precondition ('requires wallet to have already supplied enough collateral'), references sibling tool (get_compound_positions) for checking, and states no approval needed. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but is clear on requirements.

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