setCollateralSwitch

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

The annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining that error 182012 is a region restriction (do not retry or switch coins) and 182011 is a platform limit (suggest alternatives). This meaningfully helps the agent respond correctly to failures.

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 main purpose is stated in one concise, front-loaded sentence. The Agent hint is longer but each part addresses a distinct error code with a clear recommended action, so every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers the core action and two important failure modes, which is helpful for a simple two-parameter tool. It is missing guidance on how this tool relates to setBatchCollateralSwitch and does not clarify prerequisites or side effects, leaving the context adequate but incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only paraphrases the parameter names: 'specified coin' and 'enable or disable.' It does not explain the expected format of coin (e.g., symbol like BTC) or add meaning beyond what the schema's enum already provides for collateralSwitch.

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 action ('Enable or disable') and the target object ('specified coin as collateral'), so an agent can tell what the tool does. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the closely related sibling setBatchCollateralSwitch, so it misses the top score.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as setBatchCollateralSwitch or getCollateralInfo. The 'Agent hint' covers how to interpret two error codes, but it does not help an agent decide when to invoke this tool in the first place.

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