getLiquidityMiningProducts

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnly and openWorld, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: 'No authentication required (guest access supported)' and a concrete rate limit of 50 req/s per IP. This helps an agent understand access and throttling expectations without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Three short lines: purpose first, then auth, then rate limit. No filler, and each sentence adds distinct operational value.

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 read-only query with optional parameters this is minimally sufficient: auth and rate limit are covered, and no required parameters need explanation. However, it omits how the two optional coin filters behave, the default response scope, and the return shape, so an agent cannot fully predict the result.

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%, and the description does not explain baseCoin or quoteCoin, their optionality, filtering behavior, or valid values. With low schema coverage, the description had the responsibility to compensate, and it does not.

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 specific action ('Query available Liquidity Mining product listings') with a clear resource. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like getLiquidityMiningOrders or getLiquidityMiningPositions, though the 'Products' noun helps differentiate at a basic level.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getLiquidityMiningOrders, getLiquidityMiningPositions, or getLiquidityMiningYieldRecords. Auth and rate-limit details are included, but there are no when/when-not conditions or alternative tool names.

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