place_trailing_twap_order

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains the order sequence but omits details on execution, side effects, permissions, or irreversibility. For a complex order with 10 parameters, this is insufficient.

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 sentences with no redundancy. First sentence states purpose, second adds action enum and trigger explanation. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 10 params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on edge cases, parameter semantics (e.g., how amount differs buy/sell), and what happens on trigger failure.

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 30% (descriptions for trail, amount, holdings_percentage). The description adds the composite behavior logic but does not elaborate on parameters like frequency, duration, or slippage. It partially compensates but not fully.

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 trailing-then-TWAP order' and explains the composite behavior (trail triggers, then TWAP execution). This distinguishes it from siblings like place_trailing_order and 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description implies usage for combined trailing/TWAP orders but does not contrast with other order types or specify prerequisites.

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