Retrieve details and history of fixed-term crypto loan borrow orders using filters like order ID, currency, and status to track loan records.
Query borrow order details and history.
Rate limit: 5 requests per UID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| term | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| state | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| orderId | No | ||
| orderCurrency | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already cover the safety profile, and the description adds a useful rate limit of 5 requests per UID. However, it does not explain pagination behavior, how the optional filters interact, or what 'details and history' means in terms of response shape, so additional behavioral context is limited.
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 short, front-loaded, and free of filler. The rate-limit note is clearly separated and useful. It could be more informative, but as written it is concise and easy to scan.
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?
With 6 undocumented optional parameters, no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description is not complete enough for an agent to know how to invoke the tool correctly. The readOnly and openWorld hints plus the rate limit are helpful, but the core invocation semantics are missing.
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% for all 6 parameters, and the description does not explain any of them. Parameter names like orderId, orderCurrency, limit, and cursor are somewhat self-explanatory, but term and state are ambiguous, and the description does not convey valid values or how parameters combine.
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 tool queries borrow order details and history, giving a specific resource and action. It does not explicitly differentiate from related siblings like getCryptoLoanFixedBorrowContractInfo or getCryptoLoanFixedRepaymentHistory, but the 'borrow order' framing is reasonably distinct.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of typical query combinations. The only operational note is a rate limit, which does not help choose between this and related crypto-loan query tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.