Batch query investment orders

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

The description presents this as a read-only query that returns details, but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. That is a direct contradiction: an agent cannot safely reconcile 'query/returns' with 'destructive' and 'not read-only'.

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 short and front-loads the core purpose, permission requirement, and weight. The opening line repeats the title and the example adds length, but overall it remains readable and mostly efficient.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should carry more of the burden for explaining return values, but it only says 'Returns details' without describing the response shape or pagination. Combined with the annotation contradiction, the definition is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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 both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description's example shows a sample request body, but it does not add constraints, requiredness, or format meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 and resource: it returns details for a batch of Dual Investment orders by client order ID list. This is clear and distinct from generic order queries, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as pionex_earn_dual_invest_records.

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 says it requires View permission and gives a weight, but it does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like pionex_earn_dual_invest_records or single-order lookups. No exclusion conditions or selection guidance are provided.

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