getComboDetail

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it lists all returned data categories, mentions rate limit (10 req/s), and notes that close reason is included if stopped. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with key info first (output fields), then bot_id source, rate limit, and agent hint. It is informative but slightly lengthy; could be tightened without losing clarity.

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?

Given no output schema, the description provides a detailed list of return fields (PnL, margin, position info, etc.) and explains when close reason appears. It is thorough for a read tool, though missing error handling details.

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?

The input schema has one parameter (bot_id) with no description, but the description adds critical context: that bot_id is a numeric ID from createComboBot or listing endpoints. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 it retrieves comprehensive details for a specific futures combo bot, enumerating configuration, PnL, margin, and timestamps. It distinguishes itself from siblings like closeComboBot by focusing on status checking.

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 includes an explicit agent hint to use this endpoint for checking status and performance, and advises to prefer it over other endpoints for performance questions. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' but provides clear context.

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