Vault Transfers

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's addition of 'audit trail' and 'reconciliation' adds context but no behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and includes a structured list of use cases and examples. It is slightly verbose but well-organized and helpful.

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 single parameter, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description adequately covers usage context, examples, and purpose. It does not discuss return values but is sufficient for the agent to select and invoke the 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter vault_address, which is described in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's 'address of the vault to get transfers for.'

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 tracks deposit and withdrawal history for auditing/reconciliation, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like paradex_vault_balance and paradex_vault_overview by focusing on transfer history.

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 a bulleted list of when to use the tool (e.g., verify deposits, track withdrawal status, audit fund flow). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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