okx_get_copy_traders

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only labels the tool as read-only via '[L:READ]' but omits any other behavioral traits like required permissions, rate limits, or side effects. Inadequate for a mutation-free tool.

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 with a single line of tags, which is concise but lacks structured information. It front-loads a read flag and category but does not elaborate on function or output, making it minimally adequate.

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 no parameters or output schema, the description should clearly explain what it returns and when to use it. It fails to specify the nature of the copy traders (e.g., all, public, personal) or any return format, leaving 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 and schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The prerequisite hint is helpful but not parameter-related. Baseline score of 4 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 indicates a read operation on copy traders via the '[L:READ]' tag, but it does not specify whether these are public or personal copy traders, nor differentiate it from similar sibling tools like okx_get_public_lead_traders. The purpose is vaguely conveyed.

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 only states a prerequisite ('请先调用 agent_catalog') but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative copy trader tools among siblings. No context on optimal usage scenarios.

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