get_funding_rate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get current funding rate', omitting information on idempotency, error behavior (e.g., invalid instrument ID), authentication, or rate limits. Insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or constraints.

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?

One sentence, no filler, front-loaded with verb and resource. Efficient and to the point.

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?

No output schema, and the description fails to explain the return value structure (e.g., fields, format). For a simple tool, this is a significant gap. An agent cannot infer what data it will receive.

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 100% with 'instId' described as 'Instrument ID, e.g. BTC-USDT'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. No additional format or optionality details.

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 'Get current funding rate for instruments' uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (current funding rate), clearly distinguishing it from sibling like 'get_funding_rate_history' (historical rates) and 'get_mark_price' (different rate). It is explicit and unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives such as 'get_funding_rate_history' or 'get_mark_price'. The description does not clarify context or conditions for choosing this tool.

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