CoinListQuery

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds concrete behavioral constraints not present in structure: exact ACL permission, per-user and global rate limits, and a compliance-review requirement. These details go well beyond the annotations and help the agent anticipate access failures or throttling.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the four bullet points are compact, each providing non-redundant operational information. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 list-query tool, the description covers purpose, auth, ACL, rate limits, and compliance, with annotations covering safety. It does not describe the return shape or the exact meaning of the side enum values, but the tool name and schema largely fill those gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by mapping 'account type' to the required accountType parameter and 'conversion direction' to the side parameter. The coin parameter is left to inference from its name, and the enum values are not expanded, but the core semantic guidance is present.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Query convertible coin list', and adds two scoping dimensions—account type and conversion direction—that map directly to schema fields. This clearly distinguishes it from generic list tools like queryCoinList and from conversion execution/history tools.

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 gives strong operational context: API key authentication, ACL permission, rate limits, and compliance review, which help an agent know whether it is permitted to call the tool. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this tool over siblings like ConvertExecute, ConvertHistoryQuery, or CoinConvertLimitQuery; the usage context is only implied by 'convertible coin list'.

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