get_terminal_info

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

Despite no annotations, the description identifies it as a read operation ('Get terminal status') and lists the data returned. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or side effects.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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 covers the primary content of the terminal status, which is sufficient for a simple parameterless tool. Lacking an output schema, additional detail on return format would be helpful but not essential given the listing of specific fields.

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?

With zero parameters, the description's listing of returned fields adds meaning beyond the schema. For a parameterless tool, this is appropriate and adequately informative.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and explicitly lists the terminal status fields: connection state, data path, build, trade-allowed flags. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_account_info or get_rates.

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 checking MT5 terminal status but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives or any exclusions. No context about prerequisites or conditions is given.

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