okx_get_savings_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It includes [L:READ] indicating a read-only operation, but omits other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the response contains. The disclosure is minimal.

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 (one short line), but it sacrifices informativeness. It could include more useful details in the same space, such as the time range or return format.

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 complexity (many savings-related siblings, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not specify that the tool retrieves historical savings transactions, nor does it mention pagination, date range, or response structure. This leaves 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?

The schema has 100% coverage: the single optional parameter 'ccy' is described as '币种，如 USDT' (currency, e.g., USDT). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what is already in the schema, so baseline 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 only contains cryptic tags ([L:READ], CAT:[金融]) and a prerequisite instruction, but does not explicitly state that the tool retrieves savings history. The purpose is vaguely implied by the tool name but not clarified.

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 to call agent_catalog first, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus related siblings like okx_get_savings_balance or okx_purchase_savings. No conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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