Get user custom signal detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two things annotations cannot: it requires the 'Bot reading' permission and it states the API weight (1). These are genuine, actionable operational facts for an agent.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: purpose sentence, then the returned content, then weight and permission. The first line repeats the title verbatim rather than starting with the richer sentence, a small redundancy, but overall there is little waste.

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?

For a single-item read with no output schema, the description tells the agent what is returned (webhook URL, message template), what permission is needed, and the call weight. That covers the essentials; only the routing vs sibling tools 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?

Only one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema carries the semantics baseline. The description only implies that 'a specific user-defined signal' is selected by signalType; it adds no format, accepted values, or lookup-failure information beyond the schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('user custom signal detail'), and the body clarifies it returns one user-defined signal including webhook URL and message template. It is distinguishable from pionex_bot_list_user_signals by being single-item, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no 'use this when' guidance and no mention of the natural alternatives (pionex_bot_list_user_signals for enumeration, pionex_bot_signal_listener, or edit/delete siblings). The required signalType implies a detail lookup, but the agent must infer when this tool is preferable to its siblings.

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