batchCreateOrders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool is for order placement (mutation), imposes max limits, supports partial success, and provides only acknowledgment (not confirmation), directing users to confirm via WebSocket. This is fairly transparent for a batch mutation tool, though it omits authentication or rate limit details.

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 well-structured with bullet points for key behavioral traits, followed by an agent hint and TradFi note. It is concise, front-loads the purpose, and every sentence adds value. There is no unnecessary repetition or fluff.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should clarify the response format. It mentions that the response is an acknowledgment and that per-order status is in 'retExtInfo.list[].code', which gives a partial picture. However, it does not describe other possible response fields, error handling, or pagination. Given the tool's complexity (batch with many parameters), this is a notable gap, but the description covers the essential usage points.

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?

The schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds value for the 'category' parameter by explaining the TradFi mapping (spot for xStock, linear for equities/commodities). However, it does not explain the many fields inside the 'request' array (e.g., symbol, side, orderType). The description's mention of 'per-order status' is helpful but insufficient to cover the parameter richness. A more thorough parameter explanation is needed.

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 tool's purpose: 'Place multiple orders in a single API call.' It specifies the verb (place), the resource (multiple orders), and distinguishes it from single-order creation (createOrder) by emphasizing batching. The limits and partial success details further clarify its scope.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: when placing multiple orders simultaneously. It includes practical constraints (max 20 for futures/options, 10 for spot) and instructions on interpreting partial success. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the agent hint and TradFi mapping help guide usage. The exclusion of alternatives is implied by the tool's specific batch nature.

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