get_pending_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that the result set is unfilled pending orders and that symbol is an optional filter; it omits permissions, side-effect profile, pagination or ordering, and return format.

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 short, front-loaded sentences. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema or annotations, the description states the returned dataset and the optional filter. It still leaves return fields and scoping details unstated, making it adequate but not fully 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 0% for the single symbol parameter. The description adds that symbol is an optional filter, which is useful, but it does not define the symbol format or the behavior of omitting it beyond 'optionally'.

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 names the resource and state ('pending orders waiting to be filled'), so the purpose is clear. It omits an explicit verb like 'list' and does not distinguish itself from siblings such as get_positions or get_history.

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?

It only states that symbol is an optional filter. There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no when-not-to-use advice.

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