hip4_recent_settlements

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the returned fields and notes 'winning side when determinable' as a caveat. However, it does not explicitly state the operation is read-only or mention any side effects, rate limits, or data freshness. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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: first states purpose, second lists return fields. Extremely concise with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the essential action and resource.

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?

Given no output schema, the description provides a good overview of returned fields but lacks type information or structure details. It covers the core functionality well, but could benefit from a note about data ordering or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter. Still, it is sufficiently complete for a simple list tool.

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?

All three parameters (hours, limit, useToonFormat) have descriptions in the schema, covering 100% of parameters. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists recent HIP-4 settlements and enumerates the returned fields (outcome ID, settlement time, winning side when determinable, etc.). The verb 'List' and resource 'recent HIP-4 settlements' are specific, and the tool distinguishes itself from siblings like hip4_outcome by focusing on settlement data rather than current outcomes or trades.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name implies it's for recent settlements, but without comparing to siblings (e.g., hip4_outcome_recent_trades, hip4_outcome_summary), the agent must infer usage context. Minimal viable guidance is provided.

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