okx_get_subaccount_assets

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

The description provides minimal behavioral information. '[L:READ]' hints at a read operation, but there is no mention of authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects. The prerequisite is noted, but overall transparency is lacking.

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, but it is cryptic and uses unclear codes ('[L:READ]', 'CAT:'). This brevity sacrifices clarity, making it less helpful than a well-structured, plain-language description.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns. It does not. It also omits any error information or usage context beyond the prerequisite, making it incomplete for effective tool selection.

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 input schema already describes the single parameter 'subAcct' as required and provides a Chinese description. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not add any extra meaning, so the 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 does not explicitly state what the tool does. It uses cryptic codes like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[账户-子账户]' and only mentions a prerequisite ('请先调用 agent_catalog'), leaving the main function unclear. The tool name suggests retrieving subaccount assets, but the description fails to confirm this.

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. The only instruction is a prerequisite to call agent_catalog, but it does not clarify under what circumstances this tool is appropriate or when alternatives should be chosen.

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