CoinListQuery

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds significant behavioral context: it requires API Key authentication, specifies ACL permission (RESOURCE_GROUP_EXCHANGE_HISTORY + PERMISSION_READ), rate limits (30/user/s, 1500/path/s globally), and a compliance review requirement (CONVERSION product). This information helps the agent understand the tool's constraints and safety profile, though it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only (implied by 'query').

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 concise, using 5 lines to convey purpose and key behavioral traits. It front-loads the action and then lists requirements in a clear manner. No redundant information is present, though a more structured format (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability.

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 lack of output schema and 3 input parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format or the meaning of all parameters (side and coin are not elaborated). For a query tool, the user would benefit from knowing what data is returned (e.g., list of coins with types), which is missing.

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 input schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. However, it only vaguely mentions 'account type and conversion direction' without detailing the enum values for accountType or the meaning of side (0/1) and coin. This adds minimal value beyond the schema itself.

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 queries a convertible coin list under specified account type and conversion direction, providing a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'queryCoinList', though the purpose is distinct enough given the mention of conversion direction.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It provides context on authentication, permissions, and rate limits, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, nor does it mention any alternative tools for comparison.

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