get_trades

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full transparency burden. It only states 'Get recent trades' without disclosing behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, whether truncation occurs, or if results are ordered. The tool's internal behavior is opaque.

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 short sentence, which is efficient and front-loaded with the core action. No superfluous text. However, it could benefit from a brief structure like including usage context, but it remains concise.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no nested objects) and no output schema, the description is minimally complete for understanding its basic function. However, it lacks information about the return format or field details, which would be helpful for a data retrieval 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% — both parameters (instId, limit) have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what's already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the tool's action ('Get recent trades') and resource ('for an instrument'), which is specific. It distinguishes from siblings like get_candlesticks or get_orderbook by mentioning 'trades'. However, it lacks detail on what 'recent' means (e.g., time range, number of trades), so not a 5.

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 gives implied usage for fetching recent trades but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_fills_history for filled orders). No exclusion or prerequisite info is given, making it minimally adequate.

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