cancel_all_orders

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not warn that this is a destructive, irreversible bulk operation, nor does it mention potential consequences, required permissions, or the response format. The word 'TODAS' implies bulk impact but fails to elaborate on safety or side effects.

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, concise sentence in Spanish that front-loads the action ('Cancela') and clearly identifies the target. There are no wasted words or redundant content. This is an appropriate size for the simple operation.

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 destructive bulk operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what happens after cancellation, whether the action is reversible, how to handle errors (e.g., no open orders), or any response details. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the full context of the tool.

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 input schema has one required parameter 'symbol' with no description. The description mentions 'de un simbolo,' which clarifies that the symbol identifies whose orders will be canceled, but it does not explain the expected format (e.g., 'BTCUSDT') or any additional nuances. Given 0% schema coverage, the description provides only minimal compensation.

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 action with a specific verb ('Cancela') and resource ('TODAS las ordenes abiertas de un simbolo'), meaning 'Cancels ALL open orders of a symbol.' The word 'TODAS' distinguishes it from the sibling tool cancel_order, which presumably cancels a single 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?

The description does not explicitly mention when to use this tool or provide alternatives. Usage is implied from the purpose: use when you want to cancel all open orders for a given symbol, rather than individual orders. There is no guidance on exclusions or prerequisites.

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