queryStrategyOrderList

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: orders sorted newest first, pageSize maximum of 50 with default 20, status value meanings, error codes in response signaling rejection reasons, and parentOrderId linking replacement orders in chase strategies. It does not cover every quirk (e.g., exact cursor semantics), but it goes well beyond the baseline.

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 well-organized with clear sections (When to use, Order Status Values, Important notes, Agent hint) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It is slightly redundant—the Agent hint repeats common queries and the strategyId requirement—but remains scannable and readable.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the key required parameter (strategyId), status semantics, sorting, and pageSize limits, but leaves time-range parameters (BeginTimeE0/EndTimeE0), symbol, StrategyType, and cursor mechanics under-specified. It is usable for basic calls but not fully self-contained.

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 clarifies strategyId is required, explains all status enum values, and mentions pageSize defaults/maximums and pagination via cursor indirectly. However, BeginTimeE0, EndTimeE0, symbol, and StrategyType receive no explanation in the description, leaving gaps for those parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a list of child orders created by a strategy with detailed execution information.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling queryStrategyList (strategies themselves) and general getOrderList/getOrderHistory tools by scoping to strategy child orders.

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 'When to use' section lists concrete scenarios (view orders spawned by a strategy, check rejection/cancel reasons, analyze execution prices, monitor real-time status, debug execution issues) and the Agent hint provides common user queries. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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