positions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Read" implies read-only behavior, but the description omits authentication requirements, address-resolution mechanism, data freshness, pagination, and whether positions are spot, perpetual, or cross-margin.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler. It is appropriately brief, though the phrase "for one address" is somewhat unexplained given the empty parameter schema.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what position data is returned and how the address is provided. It does neither, leaving an agent without enough context to invoke or interpret the tool confidently.

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 schema has zero parameters, which sets a baseline of 4. The description's "for one address" adds a scoping hint absent from the empty schema, though it also raises the unanswered question of how the address is supplied.

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 a clear verb and resource: "Read positions." It is distinguishable from the market-data siblings, though the "for one address" scope is ambiguous because no address parameter appears in the schema.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the eleven siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The phrase "for one address" implies context but does not tell an agent when this tool is the right choice.

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