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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context — that results are the portfolio view sorted newest-first — which the annotations and schema do not convey. It stops short of describing pagination behavior or result size, keeping it below a 5.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the primary purpose and ordering stated before the sibling routing guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with all four parameters documented and annotations covering safety, the description is essentially complete; no output schema means return-value detail is not required. A minor gap remains around pagination/cursor behavior beyond the schema's limit cap, which keeps it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (type, status, limit, wallet) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the status/type filtering that the schema covers, adding no format, default, or constraint detail beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (list a wallet's Epsilon orders) plus the scoping dimensions (status/type filters) and the ordering ('portfolio view, newest first'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from get_order and list_fills, so an agent can select it without opening any schema.

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?

Names both relevant alternatives and the condition that selects each: get_order for a single order's fills, list_fills for executed trades. That is explicit when-to-use routing rather than implied context.

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