placeFixedTermOrder

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

The description discloses rate limit (5 req/s UID), parameter constraints (autoInvest only for FundPool, orderLinkId idempotency), and a hint that it locks funds. However, it doesn't mention return values, irreversibility, or authorization requirements. With no annotations, the description carries full burden but remains incomplete.

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 a clear main clause, bulleted notes, and a separate hint. The critical warning about locking funds is placed at the end, but overall structure is efficient.

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 7 parameters, 6 required, 2 enums, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter details, return value info, and comprehensive behavioral traits for a mutative operation with significant consequences.

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?

Only two of seven parameters are explained (autoInvest and orderLinkId). The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description should compensate but fails to explain productId, category, coin, amount, and accountType.

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 'Place a staking order for a fixed term product', specifying the verb (place) and resource (staking order for fixed term). It distinguishes from sibling tools like placeEarnOrder, which likely handle flexible terms.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like placeEarnOrder or placeAdvanceEarnOrder. The agent hint focuses on user confirmation, not on tool selection criteria.

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