broker_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Export' which suggests a read-only operation, but does not disclose any side effects, required permissions, or how the CSV output is returned (string/download). This lack of behavioral detail leaves the agent guessing about side effects.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and no filler. It efficiently conveys the core action and key options.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main purpose but omits details on the 'account' parameter and any limitations on the export (e.g., date filters). Annotations are absent, so this is a moderate 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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It mentions 'generic, Alpaca, or IBKR' which likely maps to the 'broker' parameter, adding meaning. However, the required 'account' parameter is not explained, leaving ambiguity.

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 uses the active verb 'Export' with a specific resource ('filled orders') and specifies the CSV header formats (generic, Alpaca, IBKR), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'orders' which likely list orders. This provides an unambiguous purpose.

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 use for exporting filled orders in broker-specific CSV formats but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'orders' or 'execution_get'. No when-not scenarios are given, so guidance is only implicit.

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