BinanceGetSpotRebateHistoryRecords

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral constraint (7-day default, 30-day maximum range) that is not fully evident from the schema alone. However, it does not explicitly state read-only side effects, pagination behavior, or what the response contains, so it falls short of fully transparent.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and key constraints. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simplicity of the tool (4 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core essentials: what it retrieves and the time constraints. It omits specifics about response structure and pagination, but these are partially inferable from the schema and the nature of history tools, making the description reasonably complete.

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 already covers all parameters with descriptions, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the default behavior of time parameters (past 7 days) and the maximum allowed range (30 days), which clarifies how startTime/endTime should be used.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieve' and clearly identifies the resource as 'history of spot rebate records' with examples of content (commission rebates and referral kickbacks). This distinguishes it from the many other Binance tools in the sibling list, such as wallet asset records or mining payment history.

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 when to use the tool: for spot rebate history, with a default of the past 7 days or a custom range within 30 days. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the unique domain (spot rebates) makes the use case clear, and the time-range constraint guides callers on parameter usage.

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