list_bot_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the account scoping is stated, but there is no disclosure about pagination, result format, filter matching behavior, or any rate-limit considerations. It is adequate for a simple list tool but not rich.

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 filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the filter details are packed efficiently into the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and all four parameters, which is enough to make a basic call. However, with no output schema, it does not describe the return shape or whether it returns bots or orders, and it lacks usage guidance relative to siblings. This leaves meaningful gaps for an agent deciding how to use the result.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does: status gets concrete examples ('RUNNING', 'FINISHED'), bot_types gets a comma-separated example ('SPOT_GRID,FUTURES_GRID'), and base/quote are explained as coin filters. It adds real meaning beyond the bare schema, though base/quote format is not specified.

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 'List' and the resource 'the account's trading bots', which distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_symbols and list_dual_products. However, the tool name says 'bot_orders' while the description says 'trading bots', creating slight ambiguity about whether it returns bots or their orders.

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 optional filters but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_spot_grid or get_order_history. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred use cases.

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