BinanceWalletDisableFastWithdrawSwitch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action itself, omitting any effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or consequences of disabling the fast withdraw switch, which is a significant gap for a potentially impactful wallet setting.

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 concise sentence, 'Disable fast withdraw switch,' with no redundant words or filler. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action.

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 simple schema (one optional parameter) and lack of output schema, the tool is low complexity. However, the absence of annotations and any explanation of the switch's significance or side effects leaves the description incomplete for safe and informed usage.

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's single parameter (recvWindow) has a description ('The value cannot be greater than 60000'), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional information about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles the semantics.

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 'Disable fast withdraw switch' clearly states the action using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'BinanceWalletEnableFastWithdrawSwitch' through the opposite verb, though it does not explicitly reference that alternative.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., the enable counterpart), no prerequisites, and no context for the 'fast withdraw switch' concept. It offers no situational or conditional information.

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