prepare_morpho_repay

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it discloses that an approve step may be included and that 'max' amount is not supported. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description's mention of approve step provides additional useful detail.

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 at two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key constraints. Every word adds value; no filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description does not mention what the tool returns (an unsigned transaction). It also omits details about when the approve step is needed, and the contradiction with the amount schema reduces completeness. For a 5-parameter tool, more context is expected.

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?

The description states 'Explicit amount only — max is not supported,' but the schema's amount parameter description explicitly allows passing 'max' for full-balance operations. This creates a direct contradiction, confusing the agent. With 100% schema coverage, the description should not override the schema without clear justification.

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 builds an unsigned Morpho Blue repay transaction, mentions an optional approve step, and explicitly notes that 'max' is not supported. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like prepare_morpho_borrow or prepare_morpho_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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The context implies it's for repaying a Morpho Blue loan, but alternatives (e.g., Aave repay) are not discussed. Usage is implicitly clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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