okx_get_balance

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

The '[L:READ]' tag hints at a read-only operation, but no annotations are provided. The description lacks details about authentication, rate limits, or side effects, which is a significant gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 but poorly structured. It is not front-loaded with a clear statement of purpose; instead, it uses cryptic tags and a prerequisite instruction that may confuse an AI agent.

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?

The description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, error behavior, or any context about account balance retrieval. Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter) and no output schema, the description should at least state what the tool returns.

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% description coverage for the 'ccy' parameter, explaining it in Chinese. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the 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 uses tags like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[账户]' but does not explicitly state that the tool retrieves account balance. The tool name 'okx_get_balance' and the input schema with 'ccy' parameter imply the purpose, so it is minimally adequate.

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 includes a prerequisite instruction '→ 请先调用 agent_catalog', which provides some usage context. However, it does not compare with sibling tools like 'okx_get_asset_balances' or specify when to use this tool over others.

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