ig_list_working_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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action (list open working orders) with no mention of limitations, side effects, or required permissions. The 'active account' concept is unexplained, and there is no context about pagination or filtering behavior beyond 'open'.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and immediately informative, embodying conciseness.

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?

While an output schema exists (which presumably documents return values), the description lacks essential context about the required timezone parameter and when to use this tool relative to siblings. The missing parameter semantics and usage guidance make the tool incomplete for an agent to select and invoke confidently.

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 sole parameter 'timezone' is required but has no description in the schema, and the tool description does not mention it at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description completely fails to explain why timezone is needed or what format it should be in, leaving the agent unable to correctly invoke the tool.

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 lists open working orders in the active account, using specific verb and resource. The name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like ig_list_positions, which list regular positions. This is a precise and unambiguous purpose.

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 usage for retrieving working orders but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like ig_list_positions or ig_cancel_working_order. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions, making the guidance helpful but not explicit.

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