Grid Trigger History

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

Given the annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the description adds useful behavioral context by listing response contents (price, quantity, executed price/qty, trigger time) and pagination support. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them. No destructive or mutation behavior is implied, matching the read-only annotation.

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 long and immediately states the purpose. It is front-loaded, specific, and contains no filler. Each clause conveys useful information: the resource, response fields, and pagination.

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?

Considering the presence of an output schema, read-only annotations, and only three simple parameters, the description provides adequate context for agent invocation. It clearly identifies the one required parameter context and the nature of the returned data. Additional nuance about alternative tools or default behaviors is available via the existing 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 description coverage is 100%, so order_id, page, and limit are already documented with defaults and purpose. The description reinforces that order_id is the grid order to fetch and that page/limit are supported, but it does not add new parameter-level detail beyond the schema. This matches 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 identifies the resource as 'trigger history for one grid order' and specifies that it contains child order details like price, quantity, executed price/qty, and trigger time. This scope clearly distinguishes it from list-level grid tools such as grid_list or grid_detail. It lacks an explicit verb but the intended action is unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool: when needing the triggered child orders for a specific grid order. It also mentions pagination via page/limit. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it, relying instead on the general context among grid-related siblings.

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