traders.positions

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation ('View') and lists returned data, but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The 'Pro feature' hint suggests access restrictions, but not explicit.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The key verb and resource are front-loaded. 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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what the user gets (market name, outcome, size, current price). It misses ordering or error handling, but is fairly complete for a simple view 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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description confirms the address parameter's purpose and adds context about output fields, but does not enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 action (view) and resource (another trader's open positions), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'positions.list' by specifying 'another trader'. It also lists the displayed fields, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 context ('useful for due diligence before copy trading') and implies the tool is for viewing others' positions, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like 'traders.analyze'. Still, usage context is clear.

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