okx_one_click_repay

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility. It only includes '[L:WRITE]' indicating a write operation but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as authorization needs, side effects, rate limits, or what the tool modifies. The description is nearly devoid of behavioral context.

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 brief but not effectively concise. It uses a cryptic format ('[L:WRITE] CAT:[交易]') that requires decoding and lacks standard structure. While short, it sacrifices clarity and fails to convey useful information efficiently.

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 tool has no output schema and only a minimal description. It does not explain what the tool returns, the outcome of the repayment, or any error conditions. For a financial operation with two required parameters, this level of detail is severely lacking.

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 has two parameters (ccy, repayCcy) with descriptions in the schema itself (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning or clarification beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 tool name 'one_click_repay' suggests a repayment function, but the description only provides a write label and category without stating the actual operation. The phrase '请先调用 agent_catalog' is a prerequisite, not a purpose statement. This leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's core function.

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, which is a usage prerequisite. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'okx_borrow_repay' or other trading tools. No exclusions or context are provided beyond the prerequisite.

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