replay_trade

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and does not reveal what happens after execution, whether it requires an active replay session, what side effects occur on position state, or potential errors. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation-like tool.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the core verb 'Execute' and resource 'trade action in replay mode'. It contains no filler and every phrase earns its place, including the parenthetical list of actions.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description conveys the core purpose adequately. However, it omits important context such as the requirement for an active replay session and the outcome of the trade action, leaving some gaps for the agent to infer. More detail would improve completeness.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'action' parameter with a description listing buy, sell, close. The tool description repeats the same values without adding new meaning, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding beyond 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Execute a trade action in replay mode' and explicitly lists the allowed actions (buy, sell, or close position). It distinguishes itself from replay control siblings like replay_start and replay_step by focusing on trade execution, not replay navigation.

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 establishes clear usage context: this is for trade actions during replay mode. It implies the tool is used when the user wants to simulate a trade in a replay session. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention prerequisites (e.g., replay must be active), so it lacks the full when/when-not guidance.

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