getFixedTermOrder

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

With no annotations, the description adds valuable behavioral context: cursor-based pagination, required parameter pairing, and a rate limit of 10 req/s. This goes beyond the schema, though it does not cover all edge cases or error handling.

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: two sentences plus three bullet points under Notes. Information is front-loaded with the main purpose, and additional details are neatly organized. No redundant or irrelevant 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides functional context (pagination, parameter constraints) but lacks full parameter semantics, return structure, and error scenarios. More detail would aid an AI agent in correct invocation.

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 compensate. It explains the relationship between productId and category, and the default for orderType. However, 8 parameters exist, and only a couple are clarified; others like startTime, endTime, limit, cursor, orderId lack 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 the tool queries fixed term order history with cursor-based pagination. The verb 'Query' and resource 'fixed term order history' are specific, and the tool name distinguishes it from sibling tools like getFixedTermPosition or getOrderHistory.

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 notes on parameter combinations (productId requires category) and default behavior (orderType not specified returns all). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like getOrderHistory or queryFixedBorrowOrders, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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