futures_account_info

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses authentication requirement and hints at read-only nature by being an account info query, but does not detail rate limits, idempotency, or whether it is destructive. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Single sentence front-loads main purpose and includes key detail (authentication requirement). No unnecessary words; every part earns its place.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, description lists core components (balances, positions, margin, P&L) which sufficiently covers the tool's scope. Could mention if it returns the entire account or any aggregate, but overall complete for a simple read-only tool.

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?

Tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). Baseline for zero params is 4, and description correctly omits any parameter details, adding no overhead.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'futures account info', listing key data fields (balances, positions, margin, P&L). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like futures_balance (more specific) and futures_position_info (positions only).

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?

States 'requires API key' as a prerequisite, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like futures_balance or futures_position_info. Usage context is implied but not fully articulated.

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