closeFGridBot

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: cancellation of pending orders and position closure, required bot state, and rate limit. It lacks details on error handling or idempotency, but the main actions are clear. The agent can infer what happens upon success.

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 concise, with each sentence serving a purpose. It starts with the main action, then lists effects, prerequisites, rate limit, and an agent hint. No unnecessary information.

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 action and prerequisites well but does not describe the return value of the tool itself (e.g., success status or error codes). It hints at using getFGridDetail for post-action details, but the immediate output is omitted. Given the simplicity of the tool and lack of output schema, this is a minor gap.

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 only parameter bot_id has no description in the schema, but the description explains where to obtain it (from createFGridBot response or getFGridDetail), adding significant value beyond the bare schema. This is a clear and helpful explanation.

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 it closes a running futures grid trading bot, distinguishing it from sibling tools like closeGridBot (spot grid) and others. The verb 'closes' and resource 'futures grid trading bot' are specific and unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use (to stop a running bot), preconditions (only running bots), and where to obtain the bot_id. It also suggests follow-up action (use getFGridDetail). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives for spot grid, but the differentiation is implied by the 'futures' qualifier.

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