buy_orders_and_contract

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions the combination but fails to disclose ordering, gas costs, slippage, or other behavioral traits relevant to a multi-step trade.

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 a single sentence that gets the main point across. It is front-loaded and concise, though it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 complexity of combining order book and AMM, the lack of output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, success criteria, or how the tool integrates with the workflow.

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% and the description adds no explanation for any of the five parameters (market, outcome, order_ids, amount_usdb, min_shares). The agent cannot infer meaning from the description alone.

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 that the tool combines order book and AMM purchases in one transaction, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'buy_order' (order book only). However, it could be more explicit about what 'AMM' or 'contract' entails.

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 vs alternatives such as 'buy_order', 'buy_multiple_orders', or 'pm_buy'. The description lacks context for choosing this combined approach.

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