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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds useful behavioral context by naming the exchanges (BitoPro, MAX) and the benchmark (international USD/TWD midpoint), and it indicates the output includes a latest premium and daily historical records. However, it omits data freshness, update frequency, return format details, and any limitations, which a no-annotation definition should ideally cover.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a topic tag; no redundant or filler text. It communicates the full scope efficiently.

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 one simple parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (latest premium and daily history) and the data sources. It could specify the return structure or data update cadence, but it is sufficient for calling 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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'days' is fully documented in the schema (default 30, max 730). The description does not mention the parameter or add any syntax beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('取得') and resource (USDT/TWD premium on BitoPro, MAX relative to international USD/TWD midpoint), including the exact metric and history scope. It is clearly distinguishable from all siblings, none of which cover this premium data.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. It does not say when this data is relevant versus trip__exchange_rates or other crypto tools. Usage is only implied by the tool name and description.

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