fetch_recent_activity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral details about the merging process, chronological sorting, and tagging of entries. It also explains how the limit parameter affects total items (up to 2x limit). This adds value beyond annotations.

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 well-structured with a clear summary line, usage guidance, parameter explanation, and return format. It is concise without wasted words, every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers the merged feed nature, parameter semantics, return structure (dict with specific fields), and tagging. It also specifies the limit range (1-50) not in the schema.

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 input schema has only a limit parameter with default and type. The description explains its semantics in detail: how many items from each source, range 1-50, default 20, and total may be 2x this. With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates and adds significant meaning.

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 it gets a unified timeline of recent trades and account movements, merging order history with deposits/withdrawals. It distinguishes from siblings like fetch_historical_order_data and fetch_transaction_list by specifying they provide separate access.

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 explicitly says 'Use this for a quick "what happened recently" overview' and mentions alternatives for separate access, providing clear context for when to use this tool versus siblings.

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