okx_get_top_traders_contract_ls_ratio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only includes a '[L:READ]' label implying it's a read operation, but does not disclose other behaviors like authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavioral profile.

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 extremely short (one line) but under-specifies the tool. It is front-loaded but lacks substance. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the content is too sparse to be helpful.

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 description does not explain the output of the tool, even though there is no output schema. With 3 parameters and no output specification, the description leaves the agent uncertain about what the tool returns. The prerequisite hint does not compensate for the lack of result description.

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%, with each parameter described in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra information beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate. It neither improves nor degrades the understanding of parameters.

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. The name 'okx_get_top_traders_contract_ls_ratio' hints at retrieving top traders' contract long/short ratio, but the description only contains a read label, category, and a prerequisite instruction. It does not differentiate this tool from similar siblings like 'okx_get_long_short_ratio' or 'okx_get_contracts_long_short_ratio'.

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 directive is '请先调用 agent_catalog' (call agent_catalog first), which is a prerequisite but not usage context. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is provided.

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