agent_copy_trader_search

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

The description includes a '[L:READ]' tag hinting at read-only behavior, but since no annotations are provided, this carries the burden. It does not disclose other traits like required permissions, rate limits, or state changes.

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 very short and uses tags for categorization. It is front-loaded with key information, but the formatting (brackets and colons) is somewhat noisy.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description fails to explain return format, pagination, or the meaning of 'optimal.' It is insufficient for an agent to use without additional context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions three performance metrics (return rate, win rate, drawdown), but only two align with sortBy options (pnl, winRate). The topN and instType parameters are unaddressed, leading to partial coverage.

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 it filters best lead traders by return rate, win rate, and drawdown, with a copy trading guide. The verb 'filter' and resource 'lead traders' are specific. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling copy trading tools, and the Chinese text may reduce clarity for non-Chinese agents.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_get_public_lead_traders. It does not provide context for selection or exclusion.

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