place_limit_twap_order

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states the order type and action, omitting whether it's destructive, requires authorization, or has rate limits. No mention of order lifecycle or failure handling.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the parameter details could be better structured (e.g., listing key params). Still, it wastes no words.

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 complexity (10 params, no output schema, many siblings), the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return values, prerequisites, or how to use correctly. A more detailed description is needed.

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 only 30% (target, amount, holdings_percentage have descriptions). The description adds no parameter meanings beyond the action enum. For a 10-parameter tool, this is insufficient.

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 places a 'limit-then-TWAP order' and specifies the action enum values. This distinguishes it from siblings like place_limit_order or place_twap_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 explains the order flow (wait for limit target, then TWAP) but provides no guidance on when to prefer this over other limit or TWAP combinations. No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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