get_trade_history

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

With no annotations, the description reveals that data is limited to the Flex query period plus local archive, and that it requires token and query ID. This adds useful behavioral context beyond a simple read operation, though it does not detail error handling or rate limits.

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, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the data source and scope, then the prerequisites. It is front-loaded with the core functionality and avoids 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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose, data sources, limitations, and prerequisites. However, it refers to an external README for configuration, which slightly reduces self-containment. Missing error scenarios are not critical due to output schema.

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 67%, with descriptions for 'days' and 'symbol'. The tool description adds prerequisite context but does not elaborate on the 'max_rows' parameter, which lacks a schema description. Overall, it adds some value but does not fully compensate for the missing schema description.

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 retrieves historical executed trades, specifies the sources (Flex query and local archive), and differentiates it from siblings like 'get_executions' and 'get_historical_data' by mentioning the Flex query dependency. The verb 'get' and resource 'trade history' are explicit.

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 implies usage is for trades from a configured Flex query but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_executions' or 'get_historical_data'. The prerequisite 'Needs IBKR_FLEX_QUERY_ID + token' is mentioned, but no direct guidance on when not to use it.

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