getOrderList

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

No annotations are present, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions pagination and polling behavior, but does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, or that it is read-only (though implied). The description is adequate but lacks explicit safety/cost disclosures that would be helpful.

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 front-loaded with purpose and key instructions, but there is significant repetition between the main description and the 'Agent hint' block. The hint recaps the do-nots and adds minor detail. The length is acceptable but could be trimmed by merging the hint into the main description, removing redundancy.

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?

With 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a general return value summary (order status, amounts, fees, time) and usage context. However, it does not explain pagination details, direction parameter semantics, or potential error conditions. It is moderately complete but leaves gaps for an agent to infer correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description should add meaning for parameters. It only provides an example for orderStatus, but does not explain tradeType, tokenCode, days, limit, pageIndex, or direction. Without parameter descriptions, the agent may misuse or misunderstand the filters. The example helps slightly but insufficiently.

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 order history with optional filters and returns paginated data including specific fields. It distinguishes itself from getBizTokenPriceList and getAssetList, but does not differentiate from similar order list tools like getOpenOrders or getPendingOrders, which are numerous in the sibling list.

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?

Excellent guidance: explicitly states when to use (after executing a trade to confirm result) and when not to use (do not for token prices or asset holdings), with specific alternative tool names. Also provides a concrete polling scenario using orderStatus filter. This fully equips the agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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