Historical Executions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds only the date range, which is already in the schema. It does not mention pagination, rate limits, or the nature of the executions (e.g., successful vs. canceled).

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, well-structured sentence conveying the essential purpose without redundancy or unnecessary 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?

Given the simple query nature and good annotations, the description is adequate. However, it lacks an indication of the return format (list of executions) and does not address the optional symbol filter's effect, leaving some ambiguity about the output.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already defines each parameter's meaning. The description provides no additional insight beyond what is in the schema, such as the format or default behavior for the optional symbol.

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 'Get historical trade executions between dates' clearly specifies the action (get) and resource (historical trade executions), and the time range distinguishes it from 'today_executions'. It does not explicitly mention that the symbol parameter is optional, but the schema covers that.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'today_executions' or 'history_orders'. There is no mention of prerequisites or preferred invocation contexts.

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