okx_reset_mmp

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., whether it mutates state), authentication needs, or rate limits. The '[L:READ]' prefix is ambiguous and may even mislead about the tool's mutating nature.

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 lacks clarity and is not front-loaded with a clear purpose. The cryptic notation and dependency instruction waste the limited space, failing to efficiently convey the tool's function.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple parameter set, the description should provide more context about what resetting MMP does, its prerequisites, and potential impacts. The current description is incomplete and leaves the agent underinformed.

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 single parameter 'instFamily' has a schema description ('产品族，如 BTC-USD。必填') that provides a concrete example and notes it is required. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema itself, justifying a score above baseline.

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 ('[L:READ] CAT:[交易] | → 请先调用 agent_catalog'), offering no explicit statement of the tool's purpose. The tool name 'okx_reset_mmp' suggests resetting Market Maker Protection, but the description fails to clarify this, relying on the name alone.

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 like 'okx_set_mmp_config' or 'okx_reset_rfq_mmp'. The description only mentions calling 'agent_catalog' first, but does not explain usage context or exclusions.

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