dzengi_get_trading_fees

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the data is public and that an optional symbol narrows the result, which is useful beyond the annotations. It does not describe pagination or return shape, but this is acceptable for a simple read-only lookup.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states action, resource, and optionality in under ten words, and every part of the sentence 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?

For a read-only, zero-required-parameter tool, the description covers what resource is read and how filtering works. No output schema exists, so the absence of an explicit return-shape description leaves a small gap, but this is unlikely to prevent correct invocation. Combined with annotations, the definition is effectively complete for its complexity.

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%, so the description must carry meaning for the 'symbol' parameter. 'Optionally filtered by symbol' conveys the parameter's role and optionality, which the bare schema lacks. It does not specify symbol format or valid values, but the parameter is simple and self-descriptive enough for baseline adequacy.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Read' plus resource 'public trading fee information' and adds an optional symbol filter, so an agent knows exactly what resource is exposed. The resource is distinct from sibling getters like dzengi_get_trading_limits or dzengi_get_leverage_settings.

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 phrase 'public trading fee information' gives clear context: use this tool when the agent needs exchange fee data rather than account state or trading limits. 'Optionally filtered by symbol' provides basic selection guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a single-purpose tool.

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