recExploreStrategy

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: a 20-rps rate limit, an 'up to 6' result cap, and multi-symbol scope. No contradiction exists between the description and the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint 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 compact and well-structured: core behavior first, then rate limit, then usage guidance. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose 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?

For a single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is returned, how many results to expect, when to use it, and how to proceed when the user wants symbol-specific data. The annotations and schema supply the remaining safety and parameter constraints.

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 adds meaning to biz_type by calling it a 'bot type' and giving an example like 'futures-grid strategies.' However, schema description coverage is 0% and the enum values 0-8 are not decoded, so the agent still lacks a definitive mapping between enum codes and actual bot types.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Returns up to 6 Aurora-recommended strategies for a given biz_type,' and clarifies that results span multiple symbols. It distinguishes this tool from symbol-specific flows by explicitly saying it is for browsing without picking a symbol first.

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 gives an explicit when-to-use condition: browse Aurora's picks for a bot type without committing to a symbol. It also names the alternative action—switching to /v5/aurora/creation when a symbol is chosen—making the routing decision clear.

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