okx_get_position_tiers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only includes '[L:READ]' suggesting read-only. It does not explicitly state that the tool is safe, non-destructive, or disclose any side effects, rate limits, or required permissions.

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?

Extremely concise but at the expense of clarity. The description is a single line in Chinese with a reference to another tool. It lacks structure and front-loads no actionable information for an English-speaking agent.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters (2 required) but no output schema. The description does not explain return values, pagination, or how the tool fits into workflows. It is insufficient for the agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters, so schema already explains parameter meaning. The description adds no value beyond schema, meeting baseline. However, no additional usage context or format guidance is provided.

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 is in Chinese ('[L:READ] CAT:[公共] | → 请先调用 agent_catalog'), which does not clearly state the tool's function in English. The name suggests retrieving position tiers, but the description fails to confirm this or explain what position tiers are, leaving purpose vague.

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 siblings. The only instruction ('请先调用 agent_catalog') is a prerequisite but does not differentiate usage context or provide alternatives.

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