ibkr_open_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'does not place, modify, or cancel orders' is largely redundant with structured metadata. It does add the useful behavioral scope of 'visible to the Gateway session,' but otherwise does not disclose additional behavior such as output format, pagination, or account filtering.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler. The second sentence earns its place by reinforcing the non-mutating nature of the tool.

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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. It states what will be returned conceptually (open orders), where the scope is limited (Gateway session), and what the tool will not do. No return schema is needed for this simple invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is effectively 100% with an empty object. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids inventing parameter details that do not exist.

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 states a specific action ('List'), a clear resource ('currently open orders'), and a scope ('visible to the Gateway session'). It also explicitly distinguishes the tool from order-management actions by stating it does not place, modify, or cancel orders, which sets it apart from any potential mutation siblings.

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 clearly conveys that this tool is for viewing open orders, and the explicit exclusion of place/modify/cancel gives useful when-not-to-use guidance. However, it does not name specific alternative tools for order mutation, so it falls just short of fully explicit routing.

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