getRecentPublicTrades

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses no authentication required, return limits (1000 records, spot: 60), reverse chronological ordering, and symbol requirements per category. Does not mention rate limits or pagination, but otherwise transparent for a read-only public endpoint.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (supported products, notes, agent hint). Sentences are efficient, though slightly redundant (agent hint repeats earlier guidance). Still 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?

Given no output schema, the description lists return fields and provides limits, auth status, and product support. Adequately covers what the tool returns and important constraints. Could include example or pagination note, but sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains symbol is required for spot/linear/inverse and that baseCoin defaults to BTC for option. It also mentions limit (up to 1000, spot 60). However, it doesn't explain baseCoin usage beyond default, optionType, or category enums fully. Adds some value but leaves gaps.

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 tool queries recent public trading history for a symbol, listing returned fields (price, size, taker direction, timestamp, sequence number). It distinguishes from siblings like getTickers and getOrderbook by explicitly saying what not to use it for.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use scenarios (inspect trade flow, retrieve trade records, correlate with orderbook) and when-not-to (not for current price, 24h stats, orderbook depth), naming alternatives like getTickers and getOrderbook. Also includes an agent hint reinforcing this.

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