get_fills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions the limitation of 'latest 100' but does not address other aspects like read-only nature, authentication requirements, or error conditions. Some transparency is present but incomplete.

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 a single concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, scope, and returned fields without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

The description provides sufficient context for a simple retrieval tool: it states what is returned, the limit, and the primary parameter. It does not describe the output structure, but that is not required since no output schema exists. Overall, the context is mostly complete for typical use.

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 provides only parameter names and types with no descriptions. The description clarifies that 'symbol' refers to the trading pair, but it does not explain the purpose or format of 'start_time_ms' and 'end_time_ms'. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fails to adequately compensate for these parameters.

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 (retrieving recent trade fills), the resource (fills for a symbol), and the scope (latest 100, with specific fields listed). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_fills_by_order' by specifying 'for a symbol'.

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 implies usage for querying recent fills for a symbol but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as 'get_fills_by_order' or 'get_recent_trades'. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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