Historical Orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying that today's orders are excluded and that dates must be in RFC3339 format, which is not evident from annotations alone. No contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences provide clear purpose, scope, and return format with no extraneous information.

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 no output schema, the description lists return fields, which is helpful. However, it lacks details on pagination, limits, error handling, or behavior for invalid dates. Given the moderate complexity (3 parameters, no nested objects), the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by emphasizing the RFC3339 format for start_at/end_at and noting the exclusion of today. Although the optional symbol filter is not mentioned in the description, the schema covers it. The description compensates for the lack of enum constraints by clarifying date format.

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 verb 'get', the resource 'historical orders', and the scope 'between dates (excludes today)'. It also lists the return fields, making it distinct from siblings like 'today_orders'.

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 for historical queries by specifying date range and exclusion of today, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'today_orders', 'order_detail', or 'history_executions'. The recommendation to use with date parameters exists implicitly.

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