get_my_trades

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

The description mentions the authentication requirement ('Requiere firma') and user-specific scope ('tuyos'), which are useful behavioral details. However, with no annotations, it lacks disclosure about the return format, result ordering, or read-only nature.

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, with every word serving a purpose. The main action is front-loaded and the additional note about the signature is kept separate and brief.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns and any output behavior. It only covers the input symbol and auth requirement, leaving limit semantics and return structure 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies 'symbol' as the trading pair ('para un simbolo'), but provides no meaning for 'limit', leaving a required parameter under-explained.

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 action: retrieving the user's own trade history for a given symbol. The phrase 'tuyos' (yours) and 'para un simbolo' (for a symbol) specify the scope, differentiating it from siblings like get_account or get_open_orders.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only notes that a signature is required, which is an authentication prerequisite rather than a usage criterion.

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