amend_order

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'in-place' and 'preserves queue priority' (conditional), but omits many behavioral aspects: permissions, destructive nature, behavior when both identifiers provided, rate limits, and return values.

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, no fluff. First sentence captures purpose and key behavior; second sentence gives essential parameter hint. 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?

Despite 8 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description only covers identification. Missing validation rules, effect of multiple parameters, error scenarios, and return details. Incomplete for a complex amendment 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains semantics for txid and cl_ord_id, but the remaining 6 parameters (order_qty, display_qty, limit_price, trigger_price, post_only, deadline) have no explanation, leaving ambiguity.

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 action (amend), the resource (existing order), and adds context about preserving queue priority. It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_order' and 'cancel_order', though it may overlap with 'edit_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?

Provides a hint to provide either txid or cl_ord_id, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cancel+add or edit_order. Lacks context for when to amend vs re-enter.

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