get_trade_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly requires PEAR_API_KEY, indicating authorization needs, and defines the scope as 'closed trades' and 'recent', implying no modification. It does not mention side effects, but the read-only nature is clear.

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 concise sentences: purpose and output, optional parameters, and requirement. No fluff; 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?

Provides enough context for a fetch tool: describes return data composition and optional filters. Lacks details on response format, error handling, or ordering, but given the simplicity, it is fairly complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description merely restates that parameters are optional and mentions date range and limit, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Clearly states it fetches the authenticated user's recent closed trades on Pear Protocol, specifying the data elements (realized PnL, entry/exit ratios, pair composition). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_open_positions or get_account_summary.

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?

Mentions optional date range and limit, which suggests usage context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is implied but not enforced.

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