list_trades

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as rate limits, pagination, or data freshness. It doesn't contradict annotations, but with annotations covering safety, the description adds minimal value, meeting the lower bar.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 the complexity (10 parameters, 0% schema coverage) and the presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter usage or behavioral traits, leaving gaps despite the output schema handling return values. For a tool with many parameters, more context is needed.

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 but fails to do so. It mentions 'ticker symbol' but doesn't explain the 10 parameters (e.g., timestamp filters, limit, sort). Without param details in the description, the agent lacks semantic understanding beyond the schema's basic titles.

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 'Get trades for a ticker symbol' states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('trades for a ticker symbol'), which meets the basic requirement. However, it's vague about scope (e.g., historical vs. real-time, time range defaults) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_last_trade' or 'list_futures_trades', missing specific differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention siblings like 'get_last_trade' for the most recent trade or 'list_futures_trades' for futures data, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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