get_pending_algo_orders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only restates the name. It does not disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, data freshness, pagination behavior, or that it returns a list. Schema parameters hint at filtering, but description adds no behavioral context.

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?

Extremely concise (4 words), but under-specified. It does not earn its brevity by covering essential information; instead, it omits usage guidance and behavioral context, making it insufficient.

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 7 parameters (all optional, for filtering and pagination) and no output schema, the description should explain what 'pending' means, what the response contains, and how pagination works. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with ambiguous expectations.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. All parameter details are already in the input schema.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'pending algo orders', distinguishing it from siblings like get_algo_order_history (history) and cancel_algo_order (cancel). However, it lacks explicit scope or filter details that could further differentiate it.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_algo_order_history or get_open_orders. The description does not mention selection criteria or context for use.

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