Deribit Instruments Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructiveHint. The description adds valuable parameter-specific behavior, such as the detailed fields returned for instrument_name (tick size, multiplier, fee rates, expiration, instrument id), which beyond annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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 one concise sentence in Chinese, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by logical conditional clauses. Every phrase earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 three primary usage modes well, but it omits behavior for the 'kind' parameter and combinations like currency+kind. With no output schema, the return format for currency and list cases is not fully specified, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 description adds semantic relationships beyond the schema: it explains that no parameters yields currencies, currency alone yields a list, and instrument_name yields detailed specs. However, the 'kind' parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving its purpose unclear despite the enum-only schema definition, so it is not fully comprehensive.

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 it queries Deribit supported currencies and tradable contracts ('查询 Deribit 支持的币种和可交易合约'), and differentiates itself from siblings by specifying three parameter-dependent response modes. The verb '查询' plus resource scope makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit parameter-usage context: omit all parameters to get currencies, pass currency to get the contract list, and pass instrument_name to get detailed specs. It does not mention alternatives or when to prefer this tool over siblings, but the usage context is clear.

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