list_chains_tvl

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

No annotations provided, but the description implies a read-only operation by stating it lists current TVL. It doesn't explicitly state non-destructiveness, but the context is clear. Returns a sorted array, and mentions parameters and return fields, which adds transparency.

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?

Concise and well-structured with two paragraphs plus Args/Returns. Every sentence contributes meaning, and the most important info 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete: covers purpose, usage, parameter, and return structure. No gaps.

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 one parameter (limit) with schema coverage 0%. Description adds value by explaining 'Number of chains to return after sorting by TVL desc (1..200)', providing range and default behavior beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: 'List blockchain networks ranked by current total DeFi TVL.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_chain_tvl_history and list_protocols by mentioning them.

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?

Provides explicit usage examples and when to use alternatives: 'Use for 'which chains have the most DeFi activity?', 'how does Solana's TVL compare to Ethereum's?', or to discover chain names you can pass to get_chain_tvl_history or list_protocols(chain=...).'

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