prepare_native_send

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

The description adds that the transaction is unsigned and that amounts are human-readable, complementing annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). No contradictions.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. Information is front-loaded.

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?

The description explains the core functionality and amount format but omits what the tool returns, prerequisites, or chain behavior. With 4 parameters and no output schema, additional context would be helpful.

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 the 'amount' parameter is explained with a description, covering 25% of parameters. The description does not explain 'wallet', 'chain', or 'to' beyond what the schema provides, and schema coverage is low.

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 native-coin send transaction and specifies ETH on Ethereum/Arbitrum, effectively differentiating it from sibling tools like prepare_token_send or prepare_solana_native_send.

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 mentions human-readable amounts but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for ERC20 tokens use prepare_token_send) or when not to use it.

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