okx_get_discount_info

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 only states 'L:READ', indicating a read operation, but discloses no other behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or side effects. This minimal disclosure is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior fully.

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 concise, but at the expense of clarity. The '[L:READ]' prefix is helpful, but the rest is cryptic and lacks structured information. The extreme brevity is not considered effective conciseness.

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?

Despite having no parameters and no output schema, the description fails to explain what 'discount info' entails, what the output looks like, or how to interpret it. The agent would lack sufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 tool has no parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. According to guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline score of 4, as no additional parameter description is needed.

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 it's a read operation in the '公共' (public) category and advises calling agent_catalog first, but does not specify what discount info is retrieved or for what purpose. The purpose is vague and leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's function.

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 ('请先调用 agent_catalog'), which provides some guidance on when to use this tool. However, it offers no comparison to sibling tools or conditions for alternative choices, limiting its usefulness beyond the single directive.

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