get_leverage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get current leverage' without confirming whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, or what side effects might occur. It does not mention anything about positionSide or edge cases like unsupported symbols.

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 a single, clear sentence that gets straight to the point. It is front-loaded with the verb and avoids extraneous wording. While it is brief, that brevity is appropriate for the tool's simplicity, though it sacrifices necessary detail.

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 tool has two parameters and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not convey what the response will look like, how positionSide affects the result, or what symbol formats are valid. The absence of annotations and output schema makes this basic sentence insufficient for a reliable AI agent.

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 input schema has two parameters (symbol, positionSide) with 0% description coverage. The description mentions neither parameter, failing to explain the required symbol format (e.g., slash-separated) or the positionSide enum values and its default of 'short'. This leaves the agent without essential context for invoking the tool correctly.

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 explicitly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('current leverage') for a specific context ('perpetual futures symbol'), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'set_leverage' that performs the opposite action.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'set_leverage'. There is no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or connections to other tools. The agent is left to infer from the tool name alone.

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