set_collateral_coin

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It only mentions a constraint (coin exclusion) but no side effects, permission requirements, or what happens on success/failure. The mutation implication is present but not elaborated.

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?

Extremely concise: three sentences with no fluff. The key information (action, arguments, constraint) is front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 is simple (2 params, no output schema). The description covers purpose and key constraint but omits return behavior, error cases, or idempotency. It is adequate for basic understanding 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description adds meaning. For 'coin', it explains it's a coin name and notes exclusion. For 'collateral_switch', it clarifies allowed values ('ON'/'OFF'). This adds basic semantic value beyond the schema's raw titles.

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 'Set collateral coin on or off' and identifies the resource. It adds a constraint (USDT/USDC cannot be set). However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'batch_set_collateral_coin', missing an opportunity to clarify single-coin use.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'batch_set_collateral_coin'. No prerequisites or context for invocation are provided, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate situation.

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