queryEscrowSubMembersV5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it returns type 6 custodial sub-accounts, pagination details (cursor-based, default page size 100, nextCursor=0 indicates last page), permissions required, and response fields. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with sections and bullet points, front-loading the purpose. It is slightly lengthy but each sentence adds value, making it clear yet organized. Some redundancy exists (e.g., 'Important notes' followed by list) but overall efficient.

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's complexity (sub-accounts, pagination, permissions) and no output schema, the description provides enough detail: response fields (UID, type, status, mode, etc.), pagination behavior, and required permissions. An agent can correctly invoke and interpret the results.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), but the description adds meaning by explaining pagination: cursor-based navigation, default page size 100, maximum 100, and interpretation of nextCursor. This goes beyond the schema's raw definitions.

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 escrow sub-accounts in paginated format, with specific verb 'query' and resource 'escrow sub-accounts'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on fund management type sub-accounts, avoiding confusion with other account-related tools.

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 context for use: Private Wealth Management scenarios, trading teams managing client funds, and requiring a trading team API key. It specifies what it returns (only escrow sub-accounts bound to the requesting team) but does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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