okx_get_interest_accrued

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

No annotations provided. The description only implies a read operation via '[L:READ]' but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or other behavioral traits expected from a financial data 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 concise but not structured as a proper description. It is a cryptic note that fails to convey the tool's functionality clearly, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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?

With three optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description does not provide sufficient context about return values, data format, or how to interpret the results, 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three optional parameters (e.g., '币种，如 USDT'). The tool description adds no additional information beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 explicitly state what the tool does. The name suggests it gets accrued interest, but the description is cryptic with '[L:READ] CAT:[账户]' and an instruction to call agent_catalog first, which is not a clear statement of purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only hint is to call agent_catalog first, but no context on use cases or exclusions among many sibling tools.

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