Trader Profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with them by presenting a read-only snapshot. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations, including the 'all-time window from up to 1000 history points' and the specific PnL/open-position fields returned.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The output list and the example are valuable without adding fluff, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is largely complete: it covers purpose, output shape, window behavior, and the relevant sibling tool. The main gap is subaccount semantics, but the schema default and example partially mitigate that.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description needed to compensate. It provides an example address but never explains what the address represents or what the subaccount parameter means beyond being an integer with a default. The agent must infer the semantics from the parameter names and tool context.

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 opens with 'Snapshot of any trader's subaccount', which clearly identifies the resource and the action. It enumerates the exact returned fields and explicitly distinguishes itself from trader_pnl_stats with 'Pair with trader_pnl_stats for deeper statistics.'

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 this tool is for a quick snapshot view and points to trader_pnl_stats for deeper analysis, giving the agent a routing signal. It does not spell out exhaustive when-to-use/when-not-to-use conditions, but the sibling guidance is clear enough.

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