get_tpsl_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states 'Get take-profit/stop-loss order history' without disclosing what the history includes (e.g., filled, cancelled, expired), whether authentication is needed, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The schema implies pagination via 'after'/'before' parameters, but the description does not mention this.

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 sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it may be too brief to cover necessary details, but it earns its place by stating the core purpose without fluff.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 5 parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what data is returned, the scope of the history (e.g., time range, order statuses), or any constraints. The tool is simple but still lacks completeness for an agent to fully understand its behavior.

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%, and the schema already describes each parameter (instId, tpslId, after, before, limit) clearly. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 for high coverage.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'take-profit/stop-loss order history', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_order_history' (general orders) and 'get_pending_tpsl' (pending orders). It is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_pending_tpsl' or 'get_order_history'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. The name implies history, but no explicit usage advice.

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