transfer_spot_perp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that direction depends on the toPerp value, but does not specify which value maps to which direction. It also omits details about reversibility, fees, or failure behavior.

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?

A single sentence efficiently conveys the core function and the key controlling parameter. No wasted words.

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 simple two-parameter transfer tool without an output schema, the description covers the essential action. However, it lacks explicit mapping for the boolean value and doesn't mention any account prerequisites or common edge cases.

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 description explains the role of the toPerp parameter (direction flag), but ignores the amount parameter's format or constraints. With 0% schema coverage, it only partially compensates for the missing parameter documentation.

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 the tool transfers funds between spot and perp, with direction determined by a boolean flag. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are read-only or order management.

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 context is clear: this is the only transfer tool among siblings, so usage is implied when moving funds between spot and perp. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or list prerequisites, but no competing tool exists.

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