Positioning: long/short ratios, taker buy/sell and CVD on Binance, Bybit, OKX

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds useful behavioral context: data is exchange-published, limited to the 30 most traded Binance USDT perps, CVD only for BTC/ETH/SOL, and refreshed every 15 minutes. It does not cover edge cases like unsupported symbols or full output structure.

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 front-loaded with the trigger phrase and packs the coverage, exchanges, fields, and refresh cadence into one dense sentence. It is efficient, though the long parenthetical list makes it slightly dense.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description lists the returned metric families and universe, making selection safe. The main gap is the unstated relationship between the optional symbol filter and the returned top-30/CVD data, which would improve completeness.

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 schema already fully documents the single symbol parameter with a pattern and example, so the baseline is 3. The description adds data-coverage context (top 30 perps, CVD symbols) but does not clarify the optional parameter's behavior or what happens when symbol is omitted.

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?

Description opens with a concrete trigger and names the resources: long/short ratios, trader positioning, taker buy/sell ratio, and CVD for perpetuals. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_cot_positioning by specifying Binance/Bybit/OKX perp data.

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?

It explicitly says 'Call this when the user asks about...' and lists the exact query types, which is strong usage guidance. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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