get_funding_rate_history

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose read-only nature, permissions, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter.

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?

Concise with clear args/returns structure. Front-loaded with purpose. Slightly verbose format but no 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?

Adequate for a simple query tool with 3 parameters. Lacks return structure details and behavioral context (e.g., rate limits) but covers parameters well.

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?

Adds meaningful context beyond schema: explains symbol with example, category values, and limit defaults/max. With 0% schema description coverage, this compensates well.

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?

Clearly states it gets funding rate history for a perpetual contract. Specific verb+resource and differentiates from many other 'get_' tools in sibling list.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives, but the name and description make purpose clear. Lacks guidance on when not to use or compare to similar history tools.

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