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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read operation ('Get') but does not disclose rate limits, data freshness, or authentication requirements. For a simple query tool, the description is adequate but lacks depth.

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 a single sentence, 17 words, front-loaded with the core action. No extraneous information.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is brief. It mentions filters but doesn't specify default ordering, result shape, or that all parameters are optional. Some important details (e.g., min_tvl filter) are missing, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats some filter options (chain, project, symbol, min_apy) but omits min_tvl and limit. It does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 retrieves DeFi yield and APY pool data from DefiLlama. The verb 'Get' and resource 'yield and APY pool data' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings (get_chain_tvl, get_defi_protocols) which focus on chain TVL and protocol lists respectively.

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 clear context for usage: it filters from 19,000+ pools by chain, project, symbol, or minimum APY. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings, though the purpose is distinct enough. No exclusion conditions are given.

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