orbs_prepare_limit_intent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description only needs to add extra behavior. It does this by specifying that the tool returns EIP-712 typed data, approval calldata, and metadata, and that signing happens externally. This clarifies the non-mutating nature and output format beyond the 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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and summarizes the outputs without unnecessary detail. Every word adds value.

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 preparation tool with no output schema, the description names three key return components (EIP-712 data, approval calldata, metadata) and mentions external wallet signing. It could be improved by indicating the follow-up step (e.g., using a submission tool), but the name and describe intent are sufficiently clear.

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 all 9 parameters are already documented in the schema with descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-level information, which is acceptable given the high coverage. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Prepare') and resource ('limit order'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like orbs_swap and orbs_place_limit. It also mentions the key output (EIP-712 data, approval calldata, metadata) which further clarifies its role.

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 phrase 'for external wallet signing' implies this is a preparation step, not a submission step, and the presence of siblings like orbs_submit_signed_order hints at a workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the direct order placement tool (orbs_place_limit) or mention any alternatives.

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