bybit_execution_history

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions 'private API', implying authentication, but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or whether it returns real-time or historical data. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 very concise (one sentence), but it under-specifies the tool. While brevity is valued, it sacrifices necessary context for a 4-parameter tool with no other documentation.

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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, 1 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not cover return values, pagination, error handling, or differentiate from multiple sibling tools. The agent lacks critical information for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema itself. The description does not add any meaning to the parameters (e.g., what 'category' values like 'spot' or 'linear' represent, or what 'symbol' and 'baseCoin' are). This leaves agents guessing about parameter usage.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('execution/trade history'), and the source ('Bybit V5 private API'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'bybit_order_history' which likely provides order-level history, and 'bybit_closed_pnl' which focuses on profit/loss.

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 does not mention when not to use it, context of use, or prerequisites like authentication.

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