okx_get_spread_trades_fills

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states '[L:READ]' (presumably read-only) but does not mention authentication, rate limits, side effects, or return behavior. The description fails to compensate for the lack of annotations.

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?

Very short (one line), but the structure is minimal and includes a prerequisite instruction. While concise, it lacks front-loading of purpose and is more like an internal note than a clear explanation.

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?

For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description should provide more context such as what the tool returns, how to obtain the spread ID, or typical use cases. The prerequisite to call agent_catalog is mentioned but not elaborated, 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 description coverage is 100% (one parameter, 'sprdId', described as '价差合约ID'). The tool description adds no further meaning beyond the schema. Score is baseline 3 as schema already covers the parameter's purpose.

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?

Description does not clearly state what the tool does. It includes a category tag '[L:READ]' and a reference to 'CAT:[策略-价差]' but no explicit verb-noun pair like 'Get spread fill trades'. The purpose is ambiguous, especially given similar sibling tools like 'okx_get_spread_fills' and 'okx_get_spread_trades'.

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 instruction is '请先调用 agent_catalog' (call agent_catalog first), which is a prerequisite but does not help an AI agent decide when to select this tool over other spread-related tools.

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