ramzinex_get_turnover

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

The description notes the tool is read-only and maps to a specific API endpoint. However, without annotations, it should disclose more about authentication requirements (beyond 'configured API token'), error behavior, or any constraints like rate limits. The read-only nature is clear, but additional behavioral traits are missing.

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 extremely concise, uses only 4 short lines for the English part, and front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence provides necessary information without fluff.

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?

The description covers the core functionality but lacks context on what the output represents (e.g., total turnover vs. per-day), how it differs from other statistical tools, or whether pagination is involved. Given the output schema exists, return values are not required, but more differentiation from siblings would help.

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?

The schema has 0% coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: days (range 1-3650, default 30) and instance (configured instance, default when omitted). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 verb (Get), resource (my trading turnover), and constraint (over a number of days). It also notes it's read-only and provides Persian purpose and API mapping, making it well-defined and distinct from many similar get_* siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ramzinex_get_orders or ramzinex_get_balance_summary. The description does not mention contextual triggers or exclusions, leaving the AI agent to infer usage.

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