getAdvanceEarnPosition

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and open-world. The description adds useful non-obvious behavior: only Active/Settling statuses are returned, `coin` filters by underlying asset, and the rate limit is UID-based. This goes beyond the schema and annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded: action, permission, rate limit, then behavioral notes. Every line earns its place and there is no filler. The `DiscountBuy notes` heading is slightly awkward but does not add unnecessary length.

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 5-parameter endpoint with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, rate limiting, status scope, and one parameter. It leaves the required `category` semantics and the `productId`/`cursor` behavior unexplained, so an agent cannot fully determine correct invocation from the description alone.

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 compensate. It explains only the `coin` parameter with a concrete BTC example, while the required `category` parameter, `productId`, `cursor`, and `limit` pagination semantics remain undocumented. This is only partial compensation for a 5-parameter tool.

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 states a clear action ('Query your active positions') and supplies product-specific context through the category enum and DiscountBuy notes. It does not explicitly say 'Advance Earn positions' or differentiate itself from sibling `getEarnPosition`, so the opening is generic despite the clear resource.

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 concrete operational context: Earn permission is required, the rate limit is 10 req/s, and only Active/Settling positions are returned. It does not name alternatives or state when to prefer this over `getEarnPosition` or `getAdvanceEarnOrder`, but the context provided is clear enough for basic routing.

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