BinanceMiningAccountEarning

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It communicates that the tool returns specific fields and supports pagination, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, mention any required permissions, or describe edge cases or response format details beyond the listed fields.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no redundant or filler text. It efficiently conveys the tool's function and key details.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's purpose and lists key output fields, which is important given there is no output schema. It also mentions pagination for large datasets. It does not mention the required 'algo' parameter or explicit auth prerequisites, but the schema handles parameter syntax. Overall, it is mostly complete for a straightforward read operation.

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 schema fully documents all six parameters with descriptions. The description adds context about pagination and output fields but does not elaborate on parameter syntax or formats beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it 'Retrieves the earnings associated with a mining account' and lists specific fields (earnings type, sub-account ID, mining account name, amount earned), giving a specific verb+resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like BinanceEarningsList, but the focus on mining account earnings provides reasonable distinction.

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 implies usage for retrieving mining account earnings, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to alternative earnings-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate.

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