get_limit_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 usefully discloses two traits: that only 'active' orders are returned (a filtering behavior) and that session-key auth is mandatory. It omits pagination, rate limits, and result ordering, which leaves meaningful gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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, no filler. The core action is front-loaded and the auth prerequisite is attached in a compact second clause.

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 three-parameter read tool with complete schema descriptions and no output schema, the description covers what it does and the key auth precondition. Only pagination/volume behavior and differentiation from similar order-listing tools are missing, which are minor given the structured data available.

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 the schema already documents userId, chainId and the encrypted session-key 'data' parameter. The description adds only a loose mapping ('for a user on a specific chain') and connects the auth requirement to the session key; it adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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 (List) and resource (active limit orders) with clear scope: a user and a specific chain. It does not, however, distinguish itself from lookalike siblings such as get_hl_open_orders or direct_cancel_order, so an agent must still infer which listing tool applies.

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 prerequisite 'Requires session-key auth' is a useful precondition, implying the agent must first obtain a session key. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or naming of alternatives (e.g. get_hl_open_orders for a different venue), so usage is only implied.

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