okx_get_staking_offers

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

The [L:READ] tag hints at a read-only operation, but with no annotations, this is the only behavioral clue. The description lacks details on side effects, rate limits, authentication, or any other behavioral traits.

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 short and front-loaded with metadata. However, it is underspecified and does not effectively communicate the tool's purpose, making it barely adequate.

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 about financial staking offers with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is extremely incomplete. It does not describe the return format, what constitutes an offer, or any contextual details beyond a prerequisite call.

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 provides full coverage for the single parameter productId. The description adds no additional meaning, so the baseline 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 only contains metadata tags and an instruction to call agent_catalog first. It does not explicitly state that this tool retrieves staking offers; the purpose is implied only from the tool name. Without the name, the description is ambiguous.

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 its many siblings (e.g., okx_get_staking_orders, okx_stake_eth). The only instruction is to call agent_catalog first, which is a prerequisite but does not help differentiate use cases.

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