get_funding_rates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns current funding rates and explains the meaning of positive/negative rates. However, it does not mention rate limits, data freshness, or any potential side effects, which is 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?

The description is fairly concise with a clear first sentence. The explanatory paragraph adds useful context but could be shortened. Overall, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 the tool has only one optional parameter and an output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (current funding rates) and how to interpret them. Nothing critical is missing for basic usage.

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 input schema has 0% coverage, meaning no parameter descriptions. The description adds valuable semantics: it specifies that 'symbols' is a comma-separated list of trading pairs with an example, which goes beyond the schema's empty description.

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 'Get funding rates from Binance Futures', specifying the verb 'Get', the resource 'funding rates', and the source. It distinguishes itself from many sibling tools which are technical indicators or other data types.

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 context for when to use this tool by explaining what funding rates indicate about sentiment and potential reversals. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it, though the context is sufficient for most agents.

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