Deribit Public Trades

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses meaningful behavior: this endpoint only returns public trades (not personal), timestamp queries route to a dedicated time-window endpoint, and sequence parameters enable sequence-based pagination. These are non-obvious traits not present in structured fields.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence adds unique guidance. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 9-parameter tool with no required fields and no output schema, the description covers the essential constraints (public-only, parameter mutual exclusions, endpoint selection). The remaining parameters are well-documented in the schema, and annotations cover safety. This is a complete, self-sufficient description.

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 coverage is high (89%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating the mandatory currency/instrument_name choice and the exclusivity between timestamp and sequence parameters, which the schema does not enforce. It clarifies endpoint behavior per parameter group beyond the individual descriptions.

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 queries all-market public trades and explicitly excludes personal trades, giving a specific verb + resource + scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like trade volumes or quotes.

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 usage context: currency and instrument_name are mutually exclusive, and timestamp-based vs sequence-based filtering are separate modes that cannot be mixed. It does not explicitly name alternatives among siblings, but the parameter guidance is strong.

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