get_orders

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavioral context: the underlying portfolio fetch happens but only the orders list is returned, and bracket orders carry a bracketId linking entry and exit legs. Pagination and result limits remain unstated.

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?

Front-loaded with the primary action, then outcomes, then a genuinely useful bracketId note, then the arg. The bracket explanation is a bit long for one field, but every sentence carries information.

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?

Covers the single optional parameter, the filtering scope, and the key return-shape nuance (bracketId grouping). An output schema exists, so the extra field enumeration is bonus rather than required; the only gap is pagination/ordering behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains that account_id is optional when the PUBLIC_COM_ACCOUNT_ID environment/config value is present, which the schema (bare 'Account Id', default null) does not convey.

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?

Specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('open/active orders on the account') and it states the scope is the full account portfolio. It does not explicitly differentiate from the singular sibling 'get_order', so an agent must infer the distinction from the plural naming.

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?

'Get all open/active orders' implies the collection-level use case versus the singular 'get_order', and 'Optional if PUBLIC_COM_ACCOUNT_ID is set' implies the config prerequisite. However, no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or named alternative is given.

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