get_locates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses sort order (creation date descending) and a real operational constraint (paper trading unavailable), but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or what 'locate requests' contain beyond what the output schema implies.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then sorting, then the availability caveat. Every sentence earns its place 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, filters, sort order, and availability, leaving only minor gaps (auth/permission expectations) for a read-style listing tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including the date-format and timezone semantics. The description only restates the filter dimensions (status, symbol, date range) without adding syntax or behavior beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 correct.

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+resource ('Returns locate requests for the account') and names the filter dimensions. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the singular sibling get_locate or from create_locate, so the agent must infer the plural/list distinction.

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?

It implies usage by listing the filter dimensions (status, symbol, date range) and states a hard constraint ('Not available in paper trading'), but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or direction to an alternative sibling tool.

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