futures_top_gainers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions sorting and filtering but does not disclose defaults, data freshness, rate limits, or the exact meaning of 'top movers' (e.g., includes negative changes? Only gainers?). This lacks sufficient behavioral context.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded with the main action.

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 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about return format, pagination, default behaviors, and whether 'top movers' includes both gainers and losers. The name says 'gainers' but description says 'movers', creating ambiguity.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by connecting the parameters to the tool's purpose (sort by 24h price change, filter by volume), but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides for those parameters.

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 the verb 'Get', the resource 'top movers on futures', and the key capabilities: sort by 24h price change and filter by volume threshold. It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like futures_ticker_24hr and futures_ticker_price.

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 implies usage for retrieving top movers based on price change and volume, but it does not explicitly provide when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state when not to use it.

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