trade_history

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses it is a read operation ('Reads the local trade journal') and is local-only ('Does not hit IBKR'). However, it does not detail output format, whether data is real-time, or how 'recent' is defined. Overall, good transparency for a simple local read.

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 extremely concise, using two short sentences to convey core purpose and behavior. Every sentence adds value, and the key phrase 'answers what did my agent do?' is front-loaded.

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?

Given one optional parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (audit log of order attempts) and where it reads from (local trade journal). However, it could clarify what 'recent' means and whether limit applies to maximum entries or pagination. It is minimally sufficient.

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 only parameter 'limit' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and is not mentioned in the tool description. The description does not explain its purpose, default, or effect on results. This fails to add value 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 explicitly states it is an audit log of recent order attempts (buys, sells, dry-runs, blocks) and answers 'what did my agent do?'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like buy/sell (execution) and account_summary (overview) by specifying it reads the local trade journal and does not hit IBKR.

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 reviewing recent actions and notes it does not hit IBKR (suggesting low cost), but does not explicitly state when to use instead of alternatives like positions, portfolio, or open_orders. It lacks exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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