Exécutions (trades)

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this as a safe read, and the description usefully discloses the data source (Core.Trades) and the fact that connectionId/accountId act as optional filters. It says nothing about ordering, pagination, or what happens when no filter is supplied, so it adds moderate rather than rich behavioral context.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and the source of truth, then the returned fields, then the filters. No filler, though the parenthetical source reference is slightly technical overhead.

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?

For a read-only listing tool with complete schema coverage and readOnlyHint annotations, the description covers the essentials and even enumerates the return fields, which matters since there is no output schema. The absence of any note on ordering or pagination beyond limit is a minor gap.

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%, with the default (100) and maximum (1000) for limit documented in the schema itself, so the schema carries parameter semantics. The description only restates that connectionId/accountId/limit are the filters, adding no syntax or interaction detail beyond 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?

States a specific verb-resource pair (history of executions from the Quantower login / Core.Trades) and enumerates the returned fields (tradeId, price, quantity, fee, orderId). It is distinguishable from view tools like get_orders/get_positions by being about fills, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling quantower_get_orders_history.

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 notes it is filterable by connectionId / accountId and supports a limit, which implies the usage context, but it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings such as quantower_get_orders or quantower_get_orders_history. Usage is left largely to inference.

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