getAdvanceEarnProductExtraInfo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond them: quotes come from institutional market makers, update at second-level frequency, require no authentication, and are subject to a 50 req/s IP rate limit. These are exactly the kinds of operational traits an agent needs to know.

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: purpose first, then operational constraints, then a useful WebSocket tip. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description covers safety, authentication, rate limiting, data freshness, and the recommended usage pattern, which is strong for a low-complexity quote endpoint. However, there is no output schema and no parameter prose, so the category/productId relationship remains ambiguous, especially since the enum allows categories beyond Dual Assets. That gap matters for correct invocation.

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 prose had the burden of explaining category and productId. It only says 'specific Dual Assets product,' which vaguely implies productId but never mentions category or that it is required. It also uses 'Dual Assets' while the category enum includes SmartLeverage, DoubleWin, and DiscountBuy, so the agent is left to infer the actual parameter roles.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'Get real-time quotes (target prices and APY) for a specific Dual Assets product.' This distinguishes it from product-list or order tools. It loses a point because it says 'Dual Assets product' while the category enum also includes SmartLeverage, DoubleWin, and DiscountBuy, creating slight ambiguity about scope.

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?

Excellent usage guidance: it explicitly says no authentication is required, gives the rate limit, and provides an alternative WebSocket topic for real-time updates with a clear recommendation to use this endpoint only for initial load or fallback. The agent knows when to call this tool versus subscribe to the stream.

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