Resume futures grid order

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds useful context that after resuming the grid restarts auto-refilling and the liquidation price moves with the market. However, it does not mention required permissions or confirm irreversibility beyond what annotations imply. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 repeats the title 'Resume futures grid order' and then provides a paragraph. The repetition is mild waste, but the operational details (auto-refilling, liquidation price movement) are front-loaded well after the redundant opening.

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 single-parameter mutation tool with annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: it runs validation then executes, and explains a behavioral side effect (auto-refilling, liquidation price adjustment). The main gap is lack of explicit prerequisite (order must be paused).

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 100% and the single parameter buOrderId is documented in the schema as 'Bot order ID'. The description does not add format or source details for buOrderId. Baseline 3 is correct when schema fully documents parameters.

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 states a specific verb (Resume) and resource (paused futures grid order), and distinguishes itself from siblings like pionex_bot_resume_futures_grid_check by noting it 'executes' after validation. This clearly separates it from the check variant and from pause/cancel siblings.

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 by referencing the resumeCheck validation flow, which hints that this should be used after the check passes. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. the check tool, nor does it note that the order must be paused first.

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