Jupiter Get Limit Orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Get all limit orders' aligns. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations (e.g., filtering capability and SAP ecosystem note).

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 two sentences. The first sentence is concise and on-point. The second sentence provides generic SAP MCP context that is not tool-specific, slightly bloating the description.

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 is read-only, has comprehensive schema coverage, and an output schema is present, the description adequately covers what the agent needs to know. Filters and wallet requirement are mentioned.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds little extra meaning, only grouping 'active and optionally historical' which mirrors the enum. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 retrieves limit orders for a wallet and mentions filtering by active/historical. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like jupiter_getOrder, which might retrieve 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jupiter_getOrder). It implies use for querying limit orders but lacks exclusions or context-specific advice.

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