get_positions

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the bar for additional behavioral context is low. The description adds only 'real-time' as a qualifier, but does not disclose authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects, nor does it contradict annotations.

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: one introductory sentence followed by a compact list of parameters with explanations. Every sentence is purposeful, and the structure is clear and 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 the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks context on pagination behavior (how to use cursor), parameter interplay, and frequency of data updates. For a tool with 6 parameters and no schema descriptions, more completeness would be beneficial.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It briefly explains each parameter (e.g., 'category: Product type - linear, inverse, option'), adding value over the schema. However, it does not detail valid combinations or constraints for all parameters.

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 'Query real-time position data', which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like get_account_info or get_coin_balance, so it misses the top score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use get_positions versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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