binance_get_rolling_ticker

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds API weight/cap (weight 4 per symbol, capped at 200), error handling for invalid window sizes, local rejection of >100 symbols, and return format differences – valuable operational context beyond the structured metadata.

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 well-structured with clear sections: overview, usage guidance, returns, examples, and error handling. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and every line adds value – no filler or tautology.

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?

Covers usage scope, alternatives, error conditions, return format, and concrete examples. Combined with the output schema and annotations, an agent has everything needed to correctly invoke this tool, including constraints and failure modes.

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?

While the description does not repeat parameter descriptions, the input schema itself fully documents every parameter (type, symbol, symbols, window_size, symbol_status, response_format) with constraints like max 100 symbols and window patterns. The description enhances this with concrete examples and error notes, providing actionable guidance without redundancy.

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 states a specific action ('Fetch price change statistics') over a custom rolling window, and immediately contrasts with binance_get_ticker_24h by noting the window is not fixed. This precisely scopes the tool and differentiates it from a key sibling.

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?

Explicit 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections name the alternative (binance_get_ticker_24h) and the condition that selects it (cheaper for 24h). This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke this tool.

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