fetch_trades

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return shape ('{ items, next_cursor }'), pagination semantics, and that the endpoint is public with no credentials. It does not mention rate limits or error behavior, but for a read-only public data tool this is a strong disclosure.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return shape, followed by pagination mechanics and an auth note. Every sentence 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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies all critical context: return shape, pagination traversal, page-size caveat, and auth requirements. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by clarifying that 'limit' sets the size of ONE page, not a total, and by explaining how 'cursor' relates to the returned 'next_cursor'. This extra context is valuable, though it does not add much about 'market_id' beyond the schema example.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('recent public trades (prints)'), scope ('for one market'), and ordering ('newest first'). It implicitly distinguishes public trades from private 'my trades', but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'get_trades', leaving some ambiguity among similarly named tools.

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 explains how to paginate ('keep calling with cursor...') and notes that no credentials are needed. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as 'get_trades' or 'fetch_my_trades', so the usage guidance is only implied.

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