get_short_selling

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: source ordering, unprocessed timestamp/ratio values, preservation of upstream fields, pagination semantics, and the exact meaning of offset zero. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context agents need.

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?

Three concise sentences, each adding distinct value: paging behavior, data fidelity, and offset semantics. The most important information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 paginated read-only history endpoint with an output schema available and a single required parameter, the description covers the key behavioral ambiguities: source order, pagination, and what the data does not represent. Nothing critical is missing.

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 low at 33%, but the description compensates for the offset parameter by explaining that offset zero is the beginning of source order and not necessarily newest. The limit parameter is adequately constrained by the schema's default and bounds, and order_book_id is already described in the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Page shortSellingHistory in source order'. This makes the tool's function immediately clear and distinguishes it from the sibling tools, none of which target short-selling history.

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 gives clear context: this is a paginated history endpoint in source order, not a full-history dump or latest-value summary. It does not name explicit alternatives, but the scope is precise enough that an agent can decide when to use it.

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