Get recent decisions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses ordering (most recent first), that risk-limit-refused actions are included, and that exchange_fill records represent exchange-side events rather than agent decisions — a non-obvious distinction that prevents misinterpretation. It stops short of covering auth, rate limits, or truncation beyond the limit parameter.

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, front-loaded with what is returned before the usage hint and the exchange_fill caveat. Sentence two is slightly conversational but still earns its place as the usage trigger.

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 output schema, the description must convey return semantics, and it does: record contents, ordering, inclusion of refused actions, and the meaning of exchange_fill entries. The only gap is the absence of any mention of volume/pagination behavior beyond the limit cap.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema stating the integer type, range, and default of 10. The description adds nothing about the limit parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (your own recent actions) and a distinguishing attribute (the reasons you gave), plus ordering. An agent can immediately tell this apart from state-lookup siblings like get_positions, get_limits, or get_book, which report current state rather than a decision log.

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?

"Useful after a restart, when you no longer remember what you already did" gives a concrete triggering context. There is no explicit when-not or named alternative, but the usage context is clear and actionable.

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