delete_hl_copy_trade

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

Annotations only say destructive=true; the description adds the critical blast radius — positions stay open, TP/SL orders are not cancelled, and the action is irreversible. This is exactly the behavioral detail an agent needs before calling a destructive delete.

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?

Front-loads PERMANENTLY, then separates consequences (positions/orders) from irreversibility and the alternative in distinct, waste-free sentences. Every sentence carries unique information.

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 destructive delete with no output schema, the description covers purpose, irreversibility, side-effect boundaries, and the alternative. Nothing an agent needs for a correct call 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 100%, so all five parameters are already documented (copyTradeId even cites get_hl_copy_trade_list). The description adds no further parameter syntax or meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (HL perp copy trade configuration) with explicit permanence emphasis. The distinction from pause_hl_copy_trade is named, so an agent can route without opening a sibling schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use routing: delete for permanent removal, pause_hl_copy_trade for temporary stop. Also directs the agent to the perp tools for closing positions/orders, covering the follow-up action.

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