okx_get_margin_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It includes '[L:READ]' which suggests read-only, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or what happens if parameters are invalid. Minimal transparency.

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 only two fragments, but it lacks substance and structure. It is under-specified, using cryptic brackets and Chinese without clear formatting. Not an example of 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?

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should explain the return value and context for use. It does not, leaving agents without enough information to properly invoke the tool or interpret results.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents the parameters (instId and mgnMode) with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema is sufficient. Baseline 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 '[L:READ] CAT:[账户]' which hints at a read operation for account margin balance, but it is too vague and does not clearly state the tool's function beyond what the name implies. It lacks specificity and fails to distinguish it from similar tools.

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 instructs '请先调用 agent_catalog' as a prerequisite, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_get_balance or other account tools. No differentiation or context is given.

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