queryTradeHistory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are sorted descending by creation time and limited to 100 records per page. This is adequate for a read-only query, but it omits details about authentication requirements, potential rate limits, or data freshness.

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 well-structured with separate sections for the main purpose, query parameters, and use cases. It is concise, with no extraneous sentences, and front-loads the core functionality.

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?

While the description covers usage, parameters, sorting, and max records, it does not specify the return structure of the historical trade records. Given no output schema, this omission leaves the agent unclear about what fields to expect, making it less complete for a query 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions time range filtering, pagination, and max 100 records, which maps to startTime, endTime, limit, and index. However, it does not explain the format for time strings, the behavior of the index parameter (e.g., offset-based), or the exact relationship between parameters. This adds some meaning beyond the bare schema but lacks full clarity.

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 historical trade records with pagination, time range filtering, and sorting. It distinguishes itself from many sibling tools (e.g., getTradeHistory, getOrderHistory) by explicitly mentioning 'historical trade records' and pagination features.

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 lists three specific use cases (trade reports, reconciliation, export for accounting) which imply when to use this tool. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternative tools for similar tasks, lacking exclusion criteria.

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