Get closed-trade history

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds behavioral context about pagination support and the types of data returned (P&L, fees, duration), which is valuable beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence delivers the core function and key details; the second provides valuable context for the AI agent. Every sentence earns its place.

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 purpose, pagination, and typical use cases. It lacks mention of return format or sorting, but the schema details page size max. For a simple list-fetching tool with good annotations and full schema coverage, it is mostly complete.

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 100%, so the existing parameter descriptions are sufficient. The tool's description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating 'Supports pagination', which relates to page/pageSize. No additional semantic details are provided for parameters.

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 action ('Fetch'), the resource ('history of closed trades'), and includes specific data fields (entry/exit, P&L, fees, duration). The title reinforces 'closed-trade history', distinguishing it from siblings like etoro_get_user_trades (open trades).

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 identifies the tool as the 'primary data source for performance analysis, win-rate, and drawdown research', guiding when to use it. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear given sibling tools.

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