Derive MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively states that the tool requires authentication and a private key for signing, which are critical behavioral traits for a financial transaction tool. However, it does not mention potential side effects like rate limits, order confirmation details, or error 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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and essential requirements. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or unnecessary information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity of a financial order placement tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers authentication needs but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like order execution guarantees, which are crucial for such a high-stakes operation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or trade-offs between order types.

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 the verb ('Place') and resource ('a new order'), specifies the order types ('limit or market'), and distinguishes this tool from siblings like cancel_order, replace_order, and execute_quote by focusing on creation rather than modification or execution of quotes.

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 usage for creating orders but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like replace_order or execute_quote. It mentions authentication requirements, which provides some context, but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection among siblings.

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