get_open_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default behavior of returning the wallet address's open orders when no user is provided, but does not mention return format, pagination, or potential errors. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence with the main purpose front-loaded and a conditional clause explaining the default behavior. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy.

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?

The tool has one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers the core functionality and the default behavior, which is sufficient for a simple read operation. It could mention the return type or address format, but these are likely obvious from context.

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% with a description for the user parameter, but the schema text is awkward and does not clarify optionality. The description adds the important nuance that omitting user returns open orders for the wallet address, which goes beyond the schema and provides meaningful parameter semantics.

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 clearly states the tool gets all open orders on Hyperliquid, specifying the verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_order_history or get_order_status by focusing on open orders, and clarifies the default behavior when no user is provided.

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 using this tool when you need current open orders, and the default wallet address behavior is stated. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or mention when not to use it, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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