okx_get_fee_rates

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The '[L:READ]' tag suggests the tool is read-only, and the instruction '请先调用 agent_catalog' establishes a prerequisite. However, it does not describe authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens on failure. The information is minimal but not contradictory.

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 brief, consisting of only two short phrases. However, it prioritizes metadata over clarity, with no explanatory sentence about the tool's core purpose. The prerequisite note is useful but poorly positioned, and the overall structure is not front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description should at least confirm what the tool returns. It fails to provide any context about the output or how the parameters affect results. The prerequisite mention is helpful but not sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full scope.

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 already describes all three parameters (uly, instId, instType) with clear descriptions, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context for the parameters, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

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 does not state the tool's function. It only contains metadata tags like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[账户]' plus a directive to call 'agent_catalog' first. The name 'okx_get_fee_rates' implies retrieving fee rates, but the description fails to confirm this, leaving the purpose ambiguous.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many sibling tools like okx_get_ticker or okx_get_trade_fee, there is no differentiation or context for selecting this tool. The directive to call agent_catalog first is a prerequisite but does not clarify usage scenarios.

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