Get recent trades

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations, the description discloses key behavioral details: results are limited to the current session, newest first, returns an empty list before the first trade, and returns a specific error code for unknown symbols. This gives the agent strong expectations about edge cases without needing to call the tool blindly.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: the core purpose appears in the first sentence, followed by use context, scope limitation, parameters, return shape, empty behavior, and errors. Every section adds useful information and there is no redundant filler.

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?

The description effectively covers what the tool returns, the parameter constraints, the current-session limitation, empty-list behavior before the first trade, and error handling for unknown symbols. Given the tool's moderate complexity and the presence of annotations, this is a complete and self-sufficient definition.

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 input schema already fully documents all three parameters with descriptions, defaults, and constraints, so schema coverage is 100%. The Args section mostly restates the schema, though it adds a concise clarifier that symbol means exactly one symbol. This is adequate but does not add substantial meaning 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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches today's most recent executed trades for one stock, newest first. It specifies the resource (trades), the scope (current session), and the ordering, distinguishing it from historical archive tools without ambiguity.

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?

It explicitly says the tool is useful for gauging very recent momentum and actual traded sizes, and warns that it only covers the current session and is not a historical trade archive. It does not name a specific alternative tool for historical data, but the exclusion is clear enough for an agent to avoid misusing it.

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