get_withdraw_limits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by enumerating the returned limit categories, but says nothing about freshness, per-account scoping caveats, or whether limits are per-asset-class, so it stays at an adequate level rather than a rich one.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and return contents in one sentence, with the parameter note kept short. The 'Args:' block largely duplicates the schema property name, but the sourcing hint 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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it resolves the one required parameter's provenance. For a simple read-only getter this is close to complete; only the absence of any guidance on when this tool applies versus related account endpoints keeps it short of full.

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% and the single parameter is bare in the schema, so the description must carry the load. It does: it identifies account_id as an account identifier and tells the agent exactly where to obtain it (get_accounts), which is actionable beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get available withdrawal limits for an account') and enumerates the exact quantities returned (free cash, blocked amounts, futures guarantees), which separates it from similarly named siblings like get_margin_attributes and get_portfolio without the agent needing to open a schema.

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 (fetch limits for a given account) and usefully names the prerequisite source for account_id ('get from get_accounts'), but never states when to prefer this over alternatives such as get_margin_attributes or get_portfolio, nor any exclusions.

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