BinanceGetSolStakingHistory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the retrieval purpose and some return fields, but omits authentication requirements, pagination behavior, rate limits, or response format details.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the tool's purpose. There is minor redundancy ('Get SOL Staking History API' followed by 'retrieve their SOL staking history'), but it is otherwise compact and free of filler.

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 history retrieval tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description provides some useful return-field context (amount, BNSOL, exchange rate, status) but does not explain pagination, time-range parameters, or how optional filters affect results. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what is in the schema, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 ('retrieve') and resource ('SOL staking history'), and specifies the data included (staked amount, BNSOL, exchange rate, status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like BinanceGetSolRedemptionHistory and BinanceGetBnsolRewardsHistory.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus related staking history/rewards tools. There are no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites mentioned.

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