okx_event_fills

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It includes '[L:READ]' hinting at read-only but not explicitly. No mention of authentication, side effects, rate limits, or pagination. The description fails to provide meaningful behavioral context.

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 extremely short but not helpful; it contains cryptic codes and a cross-reference without substance. It wastes space without conveying actionable information, failing the conciseness goal.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return values or behavior. It does not. The tool context (event fills) suggests a specific data type, but the description is wholly incomplete for an agent to invoke or understand the tool.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters (limit, instId) having Chinese descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is 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 is cryptic: '[L:READ] CAT:[预测] | → 请先调用 agent_catalog'. It does not state what the tool does (e.g., retrieve fills for event trades). The purpose is unclear, and the tool name 'okx_event_fills' alone is insufficient.

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_fills or okx_get_fills_history. The note '→ 请先调用 agent_catalog' suggests a prerequisite but is vague and does not clarify decision criteria.

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