get_positions

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

The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but with no annotations provided, the description does not explicitly confirm safety, auth requirements, or any side effects. This lack of disclosure is a gap for a tool with no annotations.

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, 5-word sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any fluff. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

Despite the simple input schema and lack of output schema, the description fails to explain what a 'position' is, what the output looks like, or any usage notes. For a tool with zero annotations and no output schema, this is insufficiently complete.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage for a single parameter ('userId'). The description adds meaning by noting 'across markets', clarifying the scope beyond the schema's minimal 'User ID' description. This helps the agent understand the tool's broader context.

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 'Get user positions across markets', specifying the verb 'Get', resource 'positions', and scope 'across markets'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_user' and 'get_market', but could be more specific about what 'positions' entails (e.g., trading 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring a valid userId or how results differ from other get tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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