subscribeRfqPublicTrades

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety and external-data profile. The description adds the public RFQ trade scope, which is useful context, but it does not explain the subscription lifecycle (how timeoutMs and messageCount terminate the call) or the return shape.

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 text is short and free of filler, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. A subscription tool with two behavior-affecting parameters needs more than a six-character phrase.

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?

With no output schema and many near-identical subscription siblings, the description should clarify what data is returned and how this subscription terminates or differs from siblings. It does neither, so the definition is not complete enough for reliable invocation.

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%, yet the description provides no information about timeoutMs or messageCount. It does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent to rely entirely on parameter names and defaults.

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 says '订阅 RFQ 公开成交' — subscribe to RFQ public trades — so the verb and resource are explicit. It conveys the core function but does not distinguish itself from closely related sibling tools like subscribeRfqTrades or subscribePublicTrade.

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?

There is no when-to-use statement, no exclusions, and no pointer to any alternative subscription tool. Given the long sibling list of similar RFQ/public trade subscriptions, an agent must guess when this one is appropriate.

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