Position Lifecycle Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the join window from the trades table and the exact fill-level fields returned, which is more than the schema or annotations convey.

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?

Two dense sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the lookup purpose and return contents; the second provides actionable usage guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only single-record lookup, the description covers what the tool returns, how it sources that data, and how it fits into the workflow with pulse_trader_lifecycles. With schema covering parameters and annotations covering safety, nothing essential 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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces that 'id' comes from pulse_trader_lifecycles, matching the schema's own note, but does not add substantial new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 and resource ('Look up one position lifecycle by its numeric ID') and clearly describes the returned data (each composing trade fill with timestamp, side, size, price, PnL, fee, tx hash). It differentiates itself from sibling list-style lifecycle tools by emphasizing the single-position drill-down 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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Use after pulse_trader_lifecycles to drill into exactly how a single position was built and unwound.' This gives clear sequencing and distinguishes it from the broader lifecycle listing tool.

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