getFeeGroupInfo

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

Discloses that no authentication is required, productType=contract is the only supported value, and returns a list of fee groups. Though no annotations are provided, the description covers key behavioral traits for a read query, missing only potential error conditions or rate limits.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (purpose, use cases, notes, agent hint). The agent hint is slightly redundant but not excessive. Overall concise and front-loaded.

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 adequately describes what is returned ('list of fee groups, each with their symbol list and fee rate table'). It also covers supported product type, optional groupId, and authentication status, which is sufficient for this simple query tool.

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%, but the description explains productType is required with only 'contract' supported, and groupId is an optional filter (1–8). This adds necessary context beyond the schema's enum values.

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 specifies 'Query the tiered fee structure for Pro-level and Market Maker clients, organized by symbol groups,' identifying the exact resource and action. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that standard account fee rates are handled by getFeeRate.

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?

Explicitly lists use cases (look up fee rates, understand symbol groups, compare rates) and provides an alternative: 'For standard account fee rates, use the Account getFeeRate endpoint instead.'

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