place_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does add valuable context: amounts and prices must be strings, and orders are simulated in demo mode. However, it omits details about live order execution, side effects, or response behavior, so it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only two sentences, immediately states the core action, and provides essential formatting and mode information. There is no fluff or redundancy, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too sparse. It lacks information about required parameters, return values, error handling, or order lifecycle. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool that places real orders.

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. It does add meaning for amount and price parameters by specifying string format with examples, but it leaves the other 8 parameters (symbol, side, type, leverage, stopLoss, takeProfit, reduceOnly, clientOrderId) without explanation. This is insufficient for a 10-parameter tool.

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 'Place a buy or sell order', using a specific verb and resource. This unambiguously identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_ticker, cancel_order, or set_leverage.

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 clear context: use this tool to place an order. It also notes that demo mode simulates orders, which is important context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it falls short of a 5.

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