hl_user_fills

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are bounded by API constraints, which is a key behavioral trait. It implies a read-only operation, and while it doesn't cover auth or error cases, the disclosure is sufficient for this simple query tool.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and provides an alternative. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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 only one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the key behavioral constraint (API-bounded) and the alternative for time windows. It does not need to explain return values since the output schema exists. It is complete enough for this tool's complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage for the single 'user' parameter. The description mentions 'user fills' but does not explain the parameter's format or expected values beyond the parameter name. This adds minimal value over the schema.

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 returns recent user fills, with 'recent' and 'user fills' defining the resource and scope. It also distinguishes itself from hl_user_fills_by_time by noting the API-bounded nature and pointing to the alternative for time-window queries.

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?

Explicitly directs the agent to use hl_user_fills_by_time for a window, providing a clear alternative. This tells the agent when to use this tool versus the sibling, even though it doesn't state exclusions.

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