get_new_crypto_loan_fixed_contract_info

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'get', which implies read-only, but does not confirm idempotency, side effects, or authorization needs. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely performs a query.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, but additional context would improve usefulness without excessive verbosity.

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 complexity of crypto loan tools and no output schema, the description lacks details about the response format or what contract info is returned. An agent would need more context to use this tool effectively.

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 0%, so the description carries full burden. It clearly explains both parameters: order_currency (filter by currency, optional) and limit (number of records, default 50). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema titles and defaults.

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 resource ('fixed crypto loan borrow contract info'). It is specific and distinguishes from many sibling tools that deal with other aspects of crypto loans, though it could be more precise about what 'contract info' includes.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_new_crypto_loan_fixed_borrow_market or get_new_crypto_loan_fixed_supply_contract. The description does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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