get_my_pnl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It describes the output content but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what side effects exist (if any), or any authentication/rate-limit considerations. The agent cannot infer safety or potential errors from the description alone.

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?

Two sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a list of specific data points. Every sentence provides value, and there is no redundant or extraneous text.

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 has one optional parameter and no output schema, the description lists the expected return components. However, it lacks details on error conditions, pagination (if any), or the structure of the output. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has only one optional parameter 'since' with a good description. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameter, but that is acceptable since the schema already handles it.

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 'Fetches' and the specific resource 'this agent's profit and loss breakdown'. It also enumerates the components (A2A earnings, rewards, etc.), making the tool's purpose distinct from sibling tools like get_defi_rates or get_transaction_status.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to inspect A2A earnings, rewards paid, protocol fees, gas costs, net P&L, and breakeven status.' It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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