get_moolah_history

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not reiterate safety. It adds value by specifying return types (position history and transaction records) but omits details like pagination or performance characteristics.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and result. It is concise, but it could be slightly more efficient by removing redundant phrasing (e.g., 'position history' and 'transaction records' are clear).

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?

With three optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns but does not detail the structure of the response. Given the lack of output schema, more information on the return format would improve completeness, but the description meets minimal expectations.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all three optional parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a user's JustLend V2 position history and recent transaction records, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('history'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_moolah_records' or 'get_moolah_user_position', which may overlap.

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 it is for historical data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many similar 'get_*' tools, and the description lacks usage context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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