place_limit_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but omits critical behavioral traits: whether order fill is guaranteed, what happens if price not reached, fee implications, or order lifecycle. The agent lacks information about the order's reliability and post-placement behavior.

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 highly concise with a one-line summary, clear 'Args:' and 'Returns:' sections, and no extraneous text. Every sentence adds value.

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 parameters and return type but lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., account setup), order lifecycle (fill/cancel), and potential failure modes. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but not fully complete for a financial trading tool.

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 description must explain all parameters. It does so with a ticker example, quantity description, limit price context, and time_validity with default and enum values. However, quantity could specify type (integer/decimal) and limit price could mention currency.

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 verb 'Place' and the resource 'limit order', specifies it is for buying or selling, and mentions the key condition 'at a specified price or better'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like place_market_order and place_stop_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 implicitly indicates usage for price-constrained orders but does not explicitly compare with alternatives (e.g., when to use limit vs market or stop orders). No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use is provided.

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