get_limit_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the session-key auth requirement, which is real context, but says nothing about whether filled/cancelled orders are excluded, whether results are paginated, or what the response looks like.

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 sentences, the core scope front-loaded before the auth prerequisite, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple read tool, though minimal.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not state what fields the list returns or how many. Combined with the lack of pagination/filtering notes, the definition is adequate but leaves gaps for a four-parameter read tool.

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%, so all four parameters (data, userId, chainId, accountRef) are documented in the schema itself. The description only gestures at 'a user' and 'a specific chain', adding phrasing but no new semantics such as whether userId or accountRef takes precedence.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List active limit orders') with clear scope ('for a user on a specific chain'). It implicitly separates itself from perp-oriented siblings like get_hl_open_orders, but never names an alternative explicitly.

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 'Requires session-key auth' clause gives a usable prerequisite, so an agent knows a session must exist first. There is still no guidance on when to pick this over sibling reads such as get_hl_open_orders or get_hl_open_orders/cancel-order flows, leaving the choice to inference.

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