toggle_spot_margin_trade

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the toggle action without mentioning side effects, permissions, rate limits, state idempotency, or what happens if already enabled/disabled. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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—two sentences, no filler. The 'Args:' section is efficient. Every word serves a purpose, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple one-parameter tool and no output schema, the description is adequate. However, it lacks behavioral context like whether the operation is reversible or requires specific permissions, which would be helpful for an AI agent to assess safety and prerequisites.

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 description explicitly maps the parameter value '1' to enable and '0' to disable, which adds crucial meaning beyond the schema (which only defines the type as string). With 0% schema description coverage, this clarification is valuable for correct invocation.

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 ('Toggle spot margin trading on or off') and the resource ('spot margin trading'). Among sibling tools like get_spot_margin_status and set_spot_margin_leverage, it uniquely identifies the on/off switching behavior.

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 implies usage (turning spot margin trading on/off) but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions. The context has many related spot margin tools, but no exclusions or comparative guidance are given.

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