okx_reset_subaccount_api_key

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

No annotations are provided. The description includes '[L:READ]' which may contradict the 'reset' action (likely a write operation), but it's ambiguous. The description does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, what happens to existing keys, authentication requirements, or rate limits. Behavioral transparency is poor.

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 (one line) but includes a prerequisite. It is not particularly front-loaded with the core action. While concise, it lacks substance and could be clearer.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the effect, return values, and side effects. The prerequisite is noted, but overall completeness is low.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, with descriptions in Chinese for all 5 parameters. The tool description does not add any parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter semantics.

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 name 'okx_reset_subaccount_api_key' suggests resetting an API key, but the description only provides a category and a prerequisite call. It does not explicitly state what the tool does or what 'reset' implies (e.g., regenerate key, revoke permissions). The purpose is vague and relies heavily on the tool name.

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 includes '请先调用 agent_catalog' (call agent_catalog first), providing a prerequisite. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus siblings like okx_create_subaccount_api_key, okx_delete_subaccount_api_key, or okx_get_subaccount_api_key. No alternatives or exclusion criteria are given.

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