BinanceAllOrders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It adds that orders can be active, canceled, or filled, which is a minor clarification, but it does not mention read-only nature, pagination limits, possible time windows, or any side effects. This is a thin description for a tool with no annotation support.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It fully states the purpose and scope without any waste, earning a top score for conciseness.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the schema covers all parameters, but the lack of annotations and no output schema leaves some gaps. The description does not clarify whether this is spot-only or includes futures (sibling names suggest a distinction), nor does it hint at response size or result structure. For a 5-parameter tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not complete.

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 the schema already documents all parameters (symbol, limit, startTime, endTime, orderId). The description does not add any parameter details beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get') and resource ('all account orders') and clearly scopes to a symbol with statuses (active, canceled, filled). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like BinanceGetOrder (single order) and BinanceGetOpenOrders (only open orders).

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 when you need the full order history rather than just open orders, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusions. The agent must infer that this is the comprehensive order retrieval tool based on the wording 'all account orders' and the sibling names.

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