orders.batch

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 states the max 10 orders and that results are per-order with success/failure status. It does not disclose atomicity, partial failure behavior, or execution guarantees, which are important for a batch mutation tool.

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, no fluff, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value, and it is easy to scan.

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 no output schema, the description covers return format (per-order results with status). It also specifies the max 10 orders limit. Missing details about error handling or ordering guarantees, but overall sufficient for a batch operation with good schema and sibling context.

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% for the single parameter 'orders'. The description adds meaning by clarifying that condition_id is a hex string, amount is in USDC, price is a limit price (or omitted for market), and side is BUY/SELL. This enriches the schema's basic descriptions.

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 executes multiple buy/sell orders in a single call with a max of 10 orders. It uses specific verbs ('Execute') and resource ('buy/sell orders'), and the constraint distinguishes it from single-order siblings like orders.buy and orders.sell.

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 implies the tool is for batching multiple orders, contrasting with single-order tools (orders.buy, orders.sell). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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