okx_stake_eth

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 beyond a misleading '[L:READ]' tag that contradicts the tool's mutating nature (staking). No mention of permissions, side effects, or confirmations.

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 uses cryptic formatting ('[L:READ] CAT:[金融]') that is not informative. It is concise but at the expense of clarity, making it less structured and useful.

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?

For a financial transaction staking ETH, the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks prerequisites, return format, execution details, and fails to leverage the schema or provide any meaningful context for an AI agent.

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% with clear parameter descriptions (amt and rate). The tool description adds no additional meaning, but the schema already provides sufficient semantic context, so baseline 3 is justified.

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 a placeholder ('[L:READ] CAT:[金融] | → 请先调用 agent_catalog') that restates the tool name's implication without clarifying the action or resource. It does not state what the tool does, relying solely on the name 'stake_eth' for meaning.

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_unstake_eth' or other staking tools. The reference to 'agent_catalog' is a dependency, not usage guidance.

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