request_small_balance_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'request a quote' without clarifying side effects, idempotency, or whether the operation is read-only or modifies state. This is insufficient for full transparency.

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 brief with a clear one-line purpose and an Args list. Every sentence is relevant, but the formatting could be cleaner (e.g., using bullet points). No unnecessary content.

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?

The tool has 3 required parameters and no output schema. The description explains parameters but does not describe the return value (e.g., quote details) or the follow-up step (confirm_small_balance_quote). It is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description details each parameter (e.g., account_type: 'UNIFIED, FUND', from_coin_list: 'List of coins', to_coin: 'e.g., USDT'). This adds meaning beyond the schema titles, though constraints like enums or formats are missing.

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's action: 'Request a quote for converting small balance coins.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like confirm_small_balance_quote and request_convert_quote.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about prerequisites, flow (e.g., that a quote should be confirmed later), or conditions under which this tool is appropriate.

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