generate_pnl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and largely fails. 'Trigger' hints at an async backend job, but it says nothing about idempotency, whether the call blocks until generation completes, what happens if PnL was already generated, or auth requirements for the wallet.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for its content, though the content itself is thin rather than the phrasing being wasteful.

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 4-parameter mutation/trigger tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate: it omits parameter semantics, post-call behavior, and any indication of what the trigger produces or returns.

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 description coverage is 0% across 4 parameters, and the description only implies walletAddress via 'for a wallet.' It adds no meaning for chain, startTime, or endTime, so the agent has no guidance on the time-range or chain semantics those fields require.

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 states a specific verb (trigger/generate) and resource (backend PnL for a wallet), which cleanly separates it from read-only siblings like get_wallet_performance or get_hl_top_traders_by_pnl. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus the many PnL/performance-reading siblings, nor any prerequisites or sequencing guidance. The agent must infer that this is a write-side trigger rather than a data fetch.

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