BinanceHashRateResaleDetail

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Retrieves' implies a safe read, but there is no mention of authentication/signed-endpoint requirements, rate limits, or that results are paged via pageIndex/pageSize, which matters for a multi-record detail call.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that front-loads the action and then lists the payload fields. It is efficient, though the field enumeration is somewhat long given it does not carry any operational guidance.

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 4-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what data comes back but says nothing about access requirements, pagination, or how it relates to the resale request/list tools. It is adequate but leaves real 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents configId, pageSize, pageIndex, and recvWindow, and the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning about the required configId or pagination behavior beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('details of hashrate resale transactions') and enumerates the returned fields (subaccounts, algorithm, hash rate, transfer date, income). This distinguishes it implicitly from BinanceHashRateResaleList, though the description never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The agent is left to infer that this is the single-config detail lookup versus the list variant, and nothing says a mining configId must already exist or how this pairs with BinanceHashRateResaleRequest.

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