okx_predictions_ticker

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool is read-only ('[L:READ]') and implies a prerequisite, which adds some context. However, it lacks details on authorization, rate limits, or consequences of not following the prerequisite.

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 but cryptic and poorly structured. It consists of tags and a directive without forming a coherent sentence. While concise, it fails to efficiently convey the tool's purpose.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how it relates to predictions, or why 'agent_catalog' must be called first. An agent would lack sufficient context.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'instId', and the description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. The description mentions 'YES/NO 资产的 instId' but this is redundant with the schema description.

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 is cryptic, using tags like '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[预测]' without clearly stating the tool's function. It does not specify that it retrieves a ticker for predictions; instead, it directs users to call 'agent_catalog' first. The purpose is not clearly communicated.

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 only states a prerequisite ('请先调用 agent_catalog') but does not indicate when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'okx_get_ticker' or 'okx_predictions_get_market'. No guidance on context or alternatives is provided.

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