place_market_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It does not disclose that market orders execute immediately, may incur slippage, or have specific fee implications. The risk of partial fills is not mentioned. This lack of behavioral detail is a significant gap for a trading operation.

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 concise with no redundant text. It uses a structured docstring format with Args and Returns sections, making parameter details easy to parse. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers essential inputs and states it returns an order placement result. However, it lacks details on execution behavior, error conditions, and order status format. For a market order tool in a financial context, additional context about immediacy and price impact would improve completeness.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description provides clear parameter explanations: symbol example 'BTCUSDT', side 'Buy or Sell', qty 'Amount to trade', category with default 'spot' and options 'spot, linear, inverse'. This fully compensates for the empty 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?

The description explicitly states 'Place a market order to buy or sell,' clearly identifying the action (placing an order), the order type (market), and the direction (buy/sell). This distinguishes it from siblings like place_limit_order and cancel_order.

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 explicit guidance on when to use a market order vs. alternatives. The name and description imply it's for immediate execution, but there is no mention of trade-offs like price uncertainty or when not to use it. Absent contrast with limit orders.

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