earn_get_movements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions it returns a paginated list with metadata and lists the types of movements, but lacks details on authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The [PRIVATE] tag hints at data sensitivity but is not explained.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant information, but the list of types could be omitted since it repeats the schema. Still, it is efficient and well-structured.

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 tool with 11 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and filters. However, it does not explain the meaning of the [PRIVATE] tag or how this tool differs from closely related siblings, leaving some context gaps.

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?

All 11 parameters have schema descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds minor value by stating 'All parameters are optional' and listing the types again, but does not provide additional meaning beyond what's in the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves movement history across all Earn positions, specifying the resource (Earn positions) and action (get movement history). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like earn_get_movements_summary and earn_get_position_movements by indicating it covers all positions.

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?

Implies usage by listing filters and noting all parameters are optional, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like earn_get_position_movements or earn_get_movements_summary. Contextual differentiation is only implicit.

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