getSpreadInstrumentsInfo

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

With no annotations, the description discloses latency during high volatility, cursor-based pagination, and no authentication required. It implicitly suggests read-only nature but does not explicitly state it. Overall, good transparency for a read tool.

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-organized with clear sections (purpose, usage, notes, agent hint). Front-loaded with main purpose. Slightly verbose but still efficient; every sentence adds 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?

Covers purpose, usage, pagination, latency, and auth. However, lacks parameter descriptions and response structure details beyond mentioning return fields. Completeness is adequate but not thorough given the tool's complexity.

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%, and the description minimally addresses parameters. It explains cursor usage for pagination but does not describe symbol, baseCoin, or limit parameters. The agent hint mentions response fields but not request parameters, leaving significant gaps.

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's purpose: querying spread instrument specifications including contract type, trading status, tick size, order limits, and leg details. It effectively distinguishes itself from the sibling tool getSpreadTickers for real-time prices.

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 provides when to use (before orders, for precision validation, component retrieval), when not to use (real-time prices), and indicates alternative (getSpreadTickers). Includes pagination guidance with cursor usage.

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