get_trades

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

Annotations are absent, so the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states the operation is read-only, maps to GET /api/trades, and returns OctoBot's own JSON body unchanged, which directly informs an agent about side effects and response handling.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the endpoint mapping and behavioral notes. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy or 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list operation without an output schema, the description is complete: it states the resource, the HTTP method, the read-only nature, and the exact response behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so the description is not required to explain parameter behavior. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids adding irrelevant parameter detail.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "List OctoBot's trade history." This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_orders, get_positions, and clear_trades_history, and the explicit endpoint mapping reinforces the exact operation.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate by stating it is read-only and not confirm-gated, meaning no confirmation is needed before invoking it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the read-only framing provides sufficient usage guidance for this simple no-parameter tool.

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