get_otc_loan_orders

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose pagination behavior, maximum limit, response structure, or whether it returns active/historical orders. The only behavioral hint is the default limit of 50, but details are absent.

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 extremely concise: one line for purpose and a simple list of parameters. No redundant words, and the key information is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description provides the essential purpose and parameter meanings. However, it could explain what constitutes an OTC loan order or mention common fields in the response, which is especially lacking due to no output schema.

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 0%, so the description adds basic meaning: order_id for filtering and limit for record count with a default. This is beyond the raw schema but still minimal, lacking format or constraints for order_id or a range for limit.

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 'Get OTC loan orders,' which clearly identifies the action and resource. The name includes 'otc_loan_orders' differentiating it from other get_otc_loan_* tools like get_otc_loan_ltv or get_otc_loan_repay_history, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_crypto_loan_ongoing_orders.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description lists optional parameters, it fails to mention typical scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions such as when to prefer get_crypto_loan_ongoing_orders.

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