getPayTokenList

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only query by stating 'Query available payment tokens' and describing the response, but does not explicitly declare it non-destructive or explain authorizations, rate limits, or error behavior. Still, the read intent is clear.

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 repetitive, restating the same advice ('Do NOT use...', 'Agent hint:...') multiple times. It could be cut by half without losing information. Every sentence does not earn its place.

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?

Adequately explains the tool's role in the trading workflow and when to call it, but falls short on parameter details and return format (no output schema). For a simple query tool with two parameters, it covers the conceptual context but fails to enable 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 coverage is 0% with no parameter descriptions. The description does not mention chainCode or tokenAddress at all, so the agent gets no guidance on how to populate these required parameters. This is a critical gap.

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 queries available payment tokens for trading, and specifies the return fields (token symbol, CEX code, limit, blockchains). It also distinguishes itself from getBizTokenList and getBizTokenPriceList, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: call before trading to resolve user input to CEX token codes, required before getTradeQuote. Also tells the agent when NOT to use it (for on-chain tokens or prices) and points to specific alternative tools, leaving no ambiguity.

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