okx_get_affiliate_link_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It includes a 'READ' hint, but otherwise no details on side effects, data retrieval scope, or authentication needs. For a tool with no parameters, the description is minimal and lacks 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 concise (one line), but its structure uses cryptic tags and Chinese characters without clear formatting. It is not well-organized for an agent to parse quickly.

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 and no parameters, the description is missing information about what the tool returns (e.g., list structure) and when it should be used beyond prerequisites. The cryptic nature leaves the agent underinformed.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter documentation. A baseline score of 4 is appropriate since no parameters exist, and the description does not mislead.

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 relies on the tool name ('okx_get_affiliate_link_list') to hint at retrieving an affiliate link list, but the description itself is cryptic with tags like '[L:READ] CAT:[推广]' and does not explicitly state the tool's purpose. It is not a tautology but lacks specificity and clarity.

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 instructs to call 'agent_catalog' first, providing a prerequisite for use. However, it does not explain when to use this tool over siblings or provide context on alternatives, leaving the agent without complete guidance.

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