get_trades

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'recent executed trades' without specifying whether it's read-only, how 'recent' is defined, or any return format details. This leaves significant ambiguity for an agent.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It includes a helpful Korean translation for clarity but does not waste words.

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 tool is simple and the purpose is clear, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what constitutes a trade record or how the results are ordered. For an agent to fully understand the return value, more detail would be beneficial, but the core usage is still inferable.

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 schema documentation is complete for both parameters (symbol and count) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional value beyond the schema, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 states a clear verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('recent executed trades'), and a scope ('for a symbol'). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like get_orderbook or get_prices, which cover different market data.

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 phrase 'for a symbol' provides clear context that the tool requires a symbol to retrieve trades. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives, though the name itself implies its purpose.

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