change_ifdoco_order_api

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action ('change') without any details on idempotency, side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or consequences of invocation. The agent cannot assess 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 extremely concise (one sentence) but front-loads the core action. However, it sacrifices necessary detail, resulting in under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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 has 5 optional parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (not shown), the description is severely lacking. It provides no context about expected behavior, parameter relationships, or what the output represents. The agent would need to infer too much from the name alone.

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%, meaning the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It does not explain any of the five parameters (first_price, root_order_id, etc.). While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no value to understanding parameter semantics.

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's purpose: changing an IFDOCO order for GMO Coin FX. It uses a specific verb ('変更する' = change) and resource ('IFDOCO注文' = IFDOCO order), which distinguishes it from siblings like change_ifd_order_api and change_oco_order_api.

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 versus alternatives. The description does not specify prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. Siblings offer similar functionality for different order types.

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