recAuroraCreationAIParams

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and open-world. The description adds the concrete cap of 'Up to 6 strategies are returned' and a rate limit of '20 requests per second per UID per path.' It also clarifies the secondary return value market_mode. These are useful behavioral facts beyond the annotations.

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 about four short sections, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by rate limit and a practical agent hint. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundant phrasing.

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, 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description gives the required param semantics, the response contents (data list up to 6, market_mode), and actionable usage guidance. It does not specify the exact structure of each strategy object, but the agent hint explains how to present them, and the missing detail is mitigated by the read-only, non-critical nature of the 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, and the description compensates by explaining that biz_type is a bot type such as SPOT_GRID and symbol is a trading pair such as BTCUSDT, which the raw enum codes ('0'-'8') do not convey. It also provides guidance on using the returned params, though it does not fully map all enum values.

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 states it returns Aurora's recommended strategies for a bot creation page, scoped by biz_type and symbol, and also returns market_mode. The phrase 'when a user is on the bot creation page' distinguishes it from likely siblings such as recAuroraHomeAIParams, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 'Agent hint' explicitly states 'Call this when the user is creating a bot and you know both the bot type and the trading pair.' This gives a clear condition for use. It also describes how to apply the response (use market_mode to pre-select grid direction, present data list). No exclusions or alternative tool names are given, so not a 5.

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