subscribe_user_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it is a real-time subscription and requires authentication, but omits key behavioral aspects such as how updates are delivered (callback_type semantics), how to stop the subscription, or connection/reconnection behavior. It does not contradict any annotations since none exist.

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?

Three concise sentences that front-load the purpose, list event types, mention authentication, and note the optional filter. There is no wasted wording, though the structure could be slightly improved by separating the auth requirement and filter into distinct lines.

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 subscription tool with no output schema and two optional parameters, the description covers the main purpose, events, auth, and filtering. However, it does not explain how the callback_type parameter affects behavior (though the schema does), and it omits how to terminate the subscription—though the sibling unsubscribe_realtime hints at this. Overall it is adequate but leaves some usage details implicit.

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 100% with both parameters documented. The description adds a phrase about optional market filtering, which mirrors the schema, but does not elaborate on callback_type options or defaults. It provides minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Subscribe to real-time updates for user's orders.' It also lists the event types (created, filled, partially filled, cancelled) and clearly distinguishes from siblings like subscribe_user_trades (trades vs. orders) and subscribe_orderbook_updates (orderbook vs. user's own 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?

Mentions a prerequisite (CLOB authentication) and an optional filter (by markets), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling subscription tools. The distinction is implied by 'user's orders' but no alternative names or exclusion conditions are given.

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