get_long_short_ratio

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

No annotations provided. The description discloses that it shows percentage of accounts long vs short and how to interpret ratio values. However, it does not mention data source, update frequency, or whether it requires specific permissions. Adds some value but lacks depth.

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 well-structured with a summary, interpretation notes, args, and returns sections. It is concise but not overly terse. Could be slightly shorter without losing clarity.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter meaning, and how to interpret results. Missing aspects like data source or typical use scenarios are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 only parameter 'symbol' is described with 'Trading pair symbol (e.g., BTCUSDT, ETHUSDT)', which adds meaning beyond the schema's type string and title. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: getting the long/short account ratio for a futures symbol. The verb 'get' and specific resource 'long/short account ratio' make it unambiguous. Among many indicator tools in siblings, this is distinct for sentiment analysis.

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 use for sentiment analysis and mentions contrarian signals from extreme ratios, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_top_trader_ratio or get_funding_rates. No exclusions or context on 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.