BinanceSpotHistoricalAlgoOrders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature implicitly with 'retrieves', but doesn't describe pagination behavior (e.g., max page size 100), the meaning of 'all' with respect to time filters, or the response structure. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name itself.

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 a single sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the key information: what it retrieves (historical SPOT TWAP orders) and from where (Binance). It earns a perfect score for conciseness.

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?

With 7 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It doesn't clarify how parameters like startTime/endTime or symbol interact, whether a symbol is needed, or what the returned data looks like. It also doesn't mention any constraints like data retention limits. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all 7 parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves historical SPOT TWAP orders from Binance, using a specific verb ('retrieves') and resource ('historical SPOT TWAP orders'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like BinanceFutureHistoricalAlgoOrder (future) and BinanceSpotCurrentAlgoOpenOrders (current open) by specifying 'historical' and 'SPOT'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it should be used for completed/closed TWAP orders or that current open orders should use BinanceSpotCurrentAlgoOpenOrders. No exclusions or alternative references.

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