getTokenPosition

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions a rate limit of 20 req/s. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, idempotent, or what happens if a position does not exist. The rate limit is useful but insufficient to fully characterize behavior.

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 very concise with two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the tool's purpose, and the second provides a rate limit. There is no extraneous information. However, it could benefit from structuring as a bullet or including a brief note on the response type.

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 the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and low complexity, the description is mostly complete. It states the tool returns a position and yield summary and provides a rate limit. However, it lacks details on the structure of the yield summary and whether the position includes open/closed status. Some context is missing for a fully informed call.

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?

The input schema has one required parameter 'coin' with enum ['BYUSDT']. Schema coverage is 0% because the description does not explain the parameter. However, the enum and tool name make the parameter obvious. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 the user's BYUSDT Token position and yield summary. The verb 'Query' and the specific resource 'BYUSDT Token position and yield summary' are unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getTokenDailyYield or getTokenOrderList by focusing on the combined position and yield summary for a specific token.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusionary criteria. The only operational detail is the rate limit, which does not help with selection among similar tools.

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