queryBrokerCap

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

The description adds substantial context beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations: a concrete rate limit (5 req/sec), caller restrictions, and the empty-response edge case. These operational details help an agent understand behavior and failure modes, and no contradiction with annotations exists.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a rate limit, and a short bulleted rule list. Every sentence adds operational value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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, zero-parameter endpoint, the description covers caller eligibility, rate limiting, and the primary edge case. With no output schema present, the description still communicates what the tool returns — rate limit usage and cap — sufficiently for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is an empty object, so the description carries no parameter documentation burden. The baseline for zero-parameter tools applies, and nothing in the description needed to compensate for schema 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 names a specific action and resource: 'Get your exchange broker account entity total rate limit usage and cap, across the board.' The focus on rate-limit usage and cap clearly distinguishes it from sibling broker tools like queryBrokerAccountInfo and queryBrokerEarning, even without naming them.

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 'Rules' section provides explicit invocation constraints: only Main UIDs, only exchange broker accounts, and an empty response if no config was applied. This is clear context, but the description does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when to choose this over related broker endpoints.

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