queryBrokerAllUidDetails

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool is read-only (query), imposes a rate limit, restricts account types, and notes missing entries for unconfigured accounts. It lacks details on pagination behavior, but the cursor parameter in the schema partially covers that.

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 concise and well-structured, with a clear purpose statement followed by bullet points for additional rules. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 should explain the return value (rate limits per UID) but does not. It covers account eligibility and rate limit but misses response details and parameter formats, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 description does not explain the three parameters (uids, limit, cursor) beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should compensate but fails to add meaning, e.g., missing format for uids or usage of cursor.

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 UID-level rate limits for all master and subaccounts using the master account. The verb 'query' and resource 'UID-level rate limits' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like getRiskLimit by focusing on broker accounts.

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 clear usage context: only exchange broker accounts can call it, rate limit of 1 req/s, and that accounts without configured rate limits won't appear. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, so it's not a full 5.

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