modify_order

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the constraint that only pending orders can be modified. It does not disclose potential side effects such as whether the modification is atomic, what happens to the original order, or any permission requirements. Minimal value beyond annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the specific changeable fields. No redundant or filler content.

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 having 12 parameters (10 required) and no output schema, the description does not explain that the full set of order fields must be supplied, nor what the response will look like. It omits preconditions beyond 'pending order' and gives no guidance on error scenarios or special cases like trigger price for stop-loss 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description repeats some param names (price, quantity, order type, trigger price) but adds no additional meaning or relationships beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Modify an existing pending order') and specifies the exact resources and fields affected (price, quantity, order type, trigger price). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like place_order and cancel_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 phrase 'existing pending order' provides clear context that this tool is for modifying already-placed orders, not for creating new ones. However, it offers no explicit exclusions (e.g., not for filled or cancelled orders) or alternative tool names, so it stops 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.