subscribeSpreadPublicTrade

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description need not restate safety. However, it adds no behavioral detail about the streaming lifecycle, event delivery semantics, or how timeoutMs/messageCount affect the subscription. The subscription behavior is implied by the tool name more than disclosed by the description.

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 short and free of filler, which is concise. But it is under-specified for a subscription tool with two parameters and many sibling subscriptions, so the brevity comes at the cost of useful structure and context.

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 minimal description, an agent lacks information about what data arrives in the subscription, how the stream terminates, or how the two optional parameters change behavior. Given the ambiguous sibling set, the description is not complete enough for reliable tool selection.

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% for two parameters, and the description does not compensate by explaining timeoutMs or messageCount. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description itself adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 action (订阅/subscribe) and a specific data type (Spread 成交数据/Spread trade data), so an agent can grasp the basic purpose. However, it does not differentiate among overlapping siblings such as subscribeSpreadExecution, subscribeSpreadOrder, subscribePublicTrade, or subscribeSpreadTickers; the exact scope remains ambiguous.

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 guidance about when to use this subscription versus alternatives. The sibling list contains several closely related subscribe tools (e.g., subscribeSpreadExecution, subscribeSpreadOrderbook, subscribePublicTrade), but the description provides no exclusionary or selection context.

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