get_funding_rates

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

The description discloses the $0.001 USDC cost, a non-obvious behavioral trait, and indicates the output includes long/short signals. However, it does not mention data source, refresh interval, or response structure, leaving gaps in transparency given no annotations exist.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core function and follow with cost. No redundant or irrelevant content.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description covers asset scope and signal type. It could provide more detail on the response format or what 'long/short signals' exactly contain, but it's functionally sufficient for selection.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, so schema covers all. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed; baseline of 4 applies per rubric.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'perpetual futures funding rates' clearly specify the tool's function. The mention of BTC/ETH/SOL and long/short signals differentiates it from sibling market data tools.

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 implies use for funding rate queries but provides no explicit comparison to siblings like get_crypto_prices or get_volatility. There are no when/when-not statements, so guidance is implied rather than stated.

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