get_pre_upgrade_order_history

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

No annotations are provided, placing full burden on the description. The description only states it returns order history but omits details on pagination, ordering, error handling, rate limits, or what 'pre-upgrade' entails. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 extremely concise, using a docstring format with a brief sentence and labeled arguments. No unnecessary words or sentences.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description should mention output format or constraints. It lacks details on pagination, sorting, or the meaning of 'pre-upgrade'. Still, it adequately covers the basic parameters and their simple semantics.

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%, so the description compensates by listing possible values for 'category' (linear, inverse, option, spot) and specifying a max of 50 for 'limit'. However, 'symbol' adds no new information beyond the schema, and 'category' values are not enumerated in 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 states the tool retrieves 'pre-upgrade order history', which clearly indicates the verb (get) and resource (pre-upgrade order history). However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like get_order_history or other get_pre_upgrade_*, relying solely on the name for distinction.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios where pre-upgrade history is relevant versus regular order history, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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