Get positions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. Description adds venue-specific mock data, cursor polling behavior, paper trading, and disclaimers. Contradiction-free.

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?

Description is concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with key purpose. Each sentence adds value, though minor redundancy in 'paper trading only' and 'not financial advice' could be merged.

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 output schema present, description covers core behavior, parameter semantics, and usage pattern. Lacks explicit note on pagination or rate limits, but adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds usage nuance for venue (mock distinction) and updatedSince (cursor polling pattern), enhancing understanding beyond schema alone.

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 it 'list open + historical positions for a venue' and distinguishes between 'futures' and 'pm' with specific return details (mock futures positions with unrealized PnL, prediction-market positions with unrealized mark). This separates it from siblings like get_portfolio.

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?

Explicitly guides on using the asOf cursor for polling and notes paper trading context. Lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the sibling list provides context.

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