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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral value with the keyset pagination contract and the mandatory loop-until-hasMore-false rule, but says nothing about whether canceled/expired orders appear or how 'reservation state' is represented.

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 tight sentence with the scope front-loaded and the pagination rule trailing. Nothing is wasted, though the pagination instruction could be split for readability.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value detail is unnecessary, and the description covers scope plus the pagination termination condition. The remaining gap is guidance on when this tool is preferable to other order-listing siblings and what reservation state entails.

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 coverage is 75%, with cursor, chainId, and marketAddress already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the keyset nature of cursor paging; it adds no new meaning for limit (capped at 100) or for marketAddress filtering.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List one keyset page of the authenticated MCP wallet's open orders') plus a distinguishing scope detail ('including reservation state'). An agent can distinguish it from listing fills or order events, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives an explicit operational rule for iteration ('Always continue with nextCursor until hasMore is false'), which is useful, but offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to alternatives such as kellian_list_order_events or kellian_get_positions. Usage is only implied by the resource being the wallet's own open orders.

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