defi_lending_rates

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

The description includes cost and free tier info ($0.03/call, 50/50 today), which is a behavioral trait not present in annotations or schema. However, it lacks details on read-only nature, data freshness, or rate limits for a complete transparency profile.

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 very short (two lines), efficiently communicating cost and API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the title-like label. However, it may be too terse to be fully useful.

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?

For a single-parameter tool without output schema, the description does not specify return values, format, or how the data is structured. It also fails to differentiate from many sibling DeFi tools, leaving the agent with insufficient context to select or use it correctly.

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 schema description for 'protocol' says '(optional)' but the schema declares it required, creating a contradiction. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, and the contradiction may confuse the agent.

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 'DeFi lending rates' implies the tool provides lending rate data, but lacks a verb (e.g., 'get', 'fetch') to clearly state the action. Compared to sibling tools like 'defi_staking_apr', the purpose is somewhat vague and does not explicitly distinguish itself.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'defi_staking_apr' or 'defi_pool_stats'. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or preferred use cases.

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