Check futures grid reduce (dry-run)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds behavioral context by stating no execution occurs and estimated data is returned, which is useful. However, it does not disclose return format details or any validation failure behavior, and the schema already documents parameters.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The inclusion of 'Weight: 1' is a minor but arguably unnecessary detail that slightly detracts from pure conciseness.

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 6 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations that cover safety, the description supplies the essential dry-run concept and usage hint. It is complete enough for correct invocation, though it could mention that no state changes occur beyond the annotation hints.

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 including enums and required fields. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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 a specific verb (Validate/Check) and resource (futures grid reduce), and adds that it is a dry-run returning estimated data without executing. It does not explicitly name the sibling pionex_bot_reduce_futures_grid as the execution counterpart, leaving some differentiation to inference, but the dry-run scope is clear.

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 a clear when-to-use ('Use this before calling reduce to preview the impact'), directly pointing to the execution tool. It does not spell out when-not-to-use or other alternatives, keeping it short of a 5.

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