get_fund_custodial_sub_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get ... list', implying a read operation, but does not mention side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or output format. The lack of detail exposes the agent to potential misuse.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, achieving maximum efficiency for the information conveyed.

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 tool has no parameters or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what 'fund custodial sub account' means, how the list is filtered, or any distinction from similar list tools. A slightly more detailed description would improve completeness.

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?

There are no parameters, so the input schema is fully covered. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, reflecting that no additional semantic guidance is needed. The tool is a simple list retrieval.

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 action 'Get' and the resource 'fund custodial sub account list'. It suggests the tool retrieves a list of sub-accounts under a fund custodial context. While it distinguishes from other list tools like get_sub_uid_list by adding 'fund custodial', the exact meaning is not fully explained, leaving some ambiguity.

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 such as get_sub_uid_list or get_broker_sub_deposit_record. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, so an agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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