vaultpilot-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the transaction is 'unsigned' and requires collateral, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output looks like, leaving gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that are front-loaded and waste no words. Every phrase ('Build an unsigned Morpho Blue borrow transaction', 'Requires pre-existing collateral') earns its place by conveying essential information efficiently.

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 the complexity of a borrow transaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and prerequisite but lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., what happens on failure, response format) that would be needed for full agent understanding, making it minimally adequate.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain 'marketId' or 'amount' further), resulting in the baseline score of 3.

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 ('Build an unsigned Morpho Blue borrow transaction') and resource ('borrow transaction'), distinguishing it from siblings like prepare_morpho_repay or prepare_morpho_supply. It also specifies the prerequisite ('Requires pre-existing collateral in the market'), which adds precision.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool by stating the prerequisite of 'pre-existing collateral in the market.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., other borrow tools like prepare_aave_borrow), which prevents a perfect score.

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