config.safety_limits

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses important behavioral traits: changes persist in the database and are enforced on all subsequent operations. This adds significant context beyond the schema. Missing details like authorization requirements or rollback possibilities, but the provided info is valuable.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The first sentence defines the tool's purpose, the second describes effects and persistence. Every sentence is earned.

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?

For a configuration tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, persistence, and enforcement scope. It lacks details on return values or error handling, but the schema fills parameter descriptions. The 'show' behavior is partially explained via schema. Overall sufficient for an agent to invoke 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists some limits but does not add meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide. No additional syntax, formatting, or usage details for parameters like 'show' or 'min_liquidity'.

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 configures trading safety guardrails, listing specific limits (max order size, exposure cap, spread tolerance). It distinguishes itself from sibling config tools by focusing specifically on safety limits enforced on subsequent operations.

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 implies use before buy/sell operations by stating limits are enforced on all subsequent operations. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like config.set or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The inclusion of a 'show' parameter offers a usage mode but no exclusions.

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