limit_buy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful implementation note ("ABI-encoded + AES-encrypted computedData"), but for a state-changing order-placement tool it omits whether the order executes on-chain, what permissions/apiKey/sessionPrivateKey are needed, and what happens on trigger.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded; nothing is wasted. The second sentence on encryption/encoding is slightly technical but earns its place as behavioral context.

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 9-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It does not cover auth flow, order lifecycle, trigger/stop-loss behavior, or what the call returns, leaving significant gaps an agent must guess at.

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 the schema already documents all 9 parameters, including the lossPercent/profitPercent defaults and raw-unit amount. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ("Create a limit buy order") and immediately defines the semantics ("buy a token when price drops to target"). This clearly distinguishes it from the market-buy sibling buy_token and from limit_sell.

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 phrase "when price drops to target" implies the usage condition for a limit order, but the description never explicitly says when to choose this over buy_token, limit_sell, or update_order, nor does it state prerequisites such as needing a signed-in session first.

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