close_position

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

Discloses that this is a write operation executing a real trade and requires an environment variable. Without annotations, it carries full burden but omits side effects, auth, or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences, each adding essential information: main action, execution options, behavioral context. No redundancy.

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?

No output schema provided, and description does not hint at return type. For a complex tool with 6 parameters and two execution modes, more details on optional parameters and response would be beneficial.

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%, and the description only explains positionId, executionType, and twapDuration. Leaves twapIntervalSeconds, randomizeExecution, referralCode undocumented.

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 verb (close), resource (one open Pear Protocol position), and method (by positionId). It distinguishes from sibling tool close_all_positions.

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?

Provides when to use: to close a position by ID with MARKET or TWAP execution. Mentions requirement PEAR_TRADE_ENABLED=true but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like adjust_position or close_all_positions.

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