getEarnOrderHistory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses default and maximum query range and pagination. It implies a read operation ('Query'), but does not explicitly state safety or side effects. This is adequate but could be improved with explicit read-only indication.

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 extremely concise with 3 short lines. It front-loads the purpose and then lists key constraints and features. Every sentence adds value.

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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits details on parameter meanings, pagination usage, and potential filtering options. The tool is relatively complex and the description does not cover its capabilities adequately.

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 0%, and the description only implicitly relates to time parameters via the default range. It does not explain the category, orderId, orderLinkId, productId, startTime, endTime, limit, or cursor parameters. Given 8 parameters, the description should provide more parameter semantics.

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 it queries stake/redeem order history. The verb 'Query' and resource 'Earn Order History' are specific. Although it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling 'getOrderHistory', the name and mention of 'stake/redeem' differentiate it.

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 usage constraints: default 7-day range and max 7-day range, plus pagination support. However, it does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'getOrderHistory' or other order querying tools.

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