Place Crypto Order

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint) by explaining idempotency via client_order_id, mutual exclusivity of qty and notional, validation rules for order types, and time-in-force restrictions. These are critical behavioral nuances not disclosed elsewhere.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence, followed by a structured list of parameter explanations. Every line adds needed detail; there is no fluff. Despite its length, it is appropriately sized for 9 parameters and reads efficiently.

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 tool's complexity (order types, TIF rules, exclusivity constraints), the description is fully complete. It covers all parameters, their interrelationships, and idempotency behavior. An output schema exists, so return value documentation is not required.

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 carry full weight for parameters. It comprehensively explains every parameter: symbol format, side values, qty/notional mutual exclusivity, type-specific requirements (e.g., limit_price for limit/stop_limit), time-in-force options, and the role of client_order_id.

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 opens with 'Place a cryptocurrency order,' which clearly states the verb and resource. The specificity to cryptocurrency distinguishes it from sibling order tools like place_stock_order and place_option_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?

It clearly indicates it is for cryptocurrency orders, implying use for crypto-only order placement, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as the stock/option order tools. The context is clear enough, but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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