getOpenOrders

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

Without annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses real-time behavior, potential latency during volatility, that openOnly=1 includes recently terminated orders (up to 500), and pagination via cursor. This is comprehensive for a read tool, though it omits permission requirements or response 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 two paragraphs plus hints, totaling about 90 words. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose. The structure is logical, though the TradFi mapping could be integrated more cleanly.

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 many sibling tools (e.g., getOrderList, getAllOrders, getPendingOrders), the description only distinguishes from getOrderHistory. It does not mention return format, pagination limits beyond 500, or authorization. For a tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, more context would be helpful.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only explains constraints for a few parameters (e.g., linear/inverse require at least one of symbol/baseCoin/settleCoin; openOnly behavior). Many parameters like orderId, orderLinkId, orderFilter, limit, cursor lack any explanation. The description adds limited value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Query real-time unfilled or partially filled orders.' It specifies the resource (open orders) and action (query), and distinguishes from getOrderHistory for historical orders. The TradFi mapping further clarifies the 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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use this endpoint to list currently active (open) orders.' It names the alternative getOrderHistory for historical orders, and gives conditional requirements for linear/inverse. The TradFi mapping also helps specific users.

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