place_order

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

With no annotations, the description does the essential job: it discloses that this sends a real order to the exchange with real money and that the default behavior is a dry-run preview gated by an environment variable. That is exactly the safety-critical context an agent needs before calling. What it does not cover is what happens on rejection, whether margin is validated, or the response shape.

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?

Two short clauses with no filler. The most important fact, that this spends real money unless gated by an environment variable, is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 13-parameter, unannotated, no-output-schema trading tool, the description covers the critical safety gate but leaves the bulk of parameter usage, conditional field requirements, and failure behavior unaddressed. It is adequate for deciding whether it is safe to call, not for calling it correctly.

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?

There are 13 parameters and only 31% schema description coverage, yet the description adds no parameter semantics at all. It says nothing about the conditional requirements the schema only partially documents, such as price for LIMIT/SL and trigger_price for SL/SL-M, or the meaning of the variety and product values.

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?

"Place a new order on Kite" gives a specific verb and resource, and the description makes clear it is a live order-entry path. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like place_gtt, place_mf_order, or place_mf_sip, so the agent must infer that "order" means a regular exchange order rather than a GTT or mutual-fund 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 implies the operative condition: a dry-run preview by default, a real order only when KITE_MCP_ENABLE_TRADING=true. However, there is no guidance on when to reach for this tool over place_gtt or place_mf_order, and no prerequisites such as checking margins or holdings first.

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