subscribeEarnDualAssets

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

The description communicates that this is a push-subscription tool, which complements the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations. However, it does not describe what messages look like, how long the subscription lasts, whether it is a continuous stream, or how the subscription can be stopped. The annotations cover the safety profile, so this does not become a severe gap.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler, and the main resource is front-loaded. However, it is so brief that it omits important usage and behavioral details, so the conciseness is more under-specification than effective compression.

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 subscription tool with no output schema and undocumented parameters, the description is too thin. It does not explain the return behavior, message semantics, timeout handling, or relationship to other subscribe tools, leaving an agent without enough information to invoke it confidently.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain timeoutMs or messageCount at all. The parameter names are mildly self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning about what 'timeout' applies to or what 'message count' counts.

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 ('订阅' / subscribe) and resource ('Earn 双币理财产品' / Earn dual-currency product) plus the nature of the operation ('推送' / push). It is clear enough that an agent can tell this is a subscription tool for Earn dual-currency products, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from the many other subscribe* siblings.

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 guidance about when to use this tool instead of other subscription tools such as subscribeTickers, subscribeWallet, or subscribeSystemStatus. There is no context about intended scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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