segnals_control_copy_trading

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the copy-trading mechanism (mirroring trades) and the two-step confirmation process. It also specifies access requirements (scope and VIP tier). While it could detail the effects of stopping (e.g., immediate cessation), the current description adequately conveys the tool's behavior.

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 concise with four sentences. It front-loads the main action and prerequisites, then explains the confirmation flow and core functionality. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and behavioral nuances. It does not describe the response format, but the absence of an output schema reduces the need. The description is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already provides parameter details. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the two-step confirmation (linking to the 'confirm' parameter) and the overall purpose of copy trading. This enhances understanding of how parameters interact, especially the preview-then-execute pattern.

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 explicitly states 'Start or stop copy trading for an exchange' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like segnals_get_copy_trading (read-only) and segnals_start_bot (different resource). The explanation of mirroring trades further clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: requires scope 'control:bots' and VIP tier. It also explains the two-step confirmation workflow (preview then execute). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools, though the need for such guidance is minimal given the tool's distinct functionality.

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