paper_trade_record

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 clearly explains safety (no live order), durability, timing behavior (pre-open waits, after-close expires), and the submitted_at/backtest constraint. It does not mention idempotency handling or what happens on successful creation, but the output schema covers return values. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the schema, so it merits a high score, though it is not exhaustive, preventing a 5.

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 exceptionally concise, using only three sentences to convey the core purpose and critical behavioral constraints. It is front-loaded with the primary action and immediately distinguishes simulation from live execution. Every sentence adds unique value with no wasted words.

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 tool with 10 parameters, 5 required, an output schema, and multiple conditional behaviors, the description covers the most critical operational aspects: the simulation-only nature, the DAY order semantics, regular-hours restrictions, and submitted_at handling. It does not explain idempotency details or the conditional limit_price requirements, but these are partially covered by schema descriptions. Given the complexity and existing schema support, the description is quite complete but leaves some gaps that prevent a 5.

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 description coverage is low (40% per context, though actual text has more). The description adds meaning to submitted_at and backtest ('Without submitted_at, the server timestamps receipt. Historical submitted_at requires backtest=true') and clarifies DAY as time_in_force. However, it does not explain key parameters like order_type, limit_price, or position_side, which have sparse schema descriptions. The description partially compensates for the schema gap but leaves several parameters under-explained.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Durably record') and a precise resource ('simulation-only whole-share US-equity DAY entry intent'). It explicitly distinguishes from live/broker-paper orders and is clearly differentiated from the sibling tools (e.g., paper_trade_close for closing positions) through the term 'entry intent'.

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: it is for simulation-only entry recording, and it explicitly states 'never sends a live or broker-paper order', which guides the agent against using it for live trading. It also mentions the backtest requirement for historical submitted_at. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as paper_trade_close for closing positions, so it lacks a full when-not-to-use comparison against siblings.

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