get_my_open_limit_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scoping detail that results span limit and stop orders, but says nothing about authorization requirements, pagination, or whether the list can be empty.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose in one line and a compact Args block; every sentence earns its place. The 'Args:' scaffolding is marginally noisy but harmless.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a simple read-only listing tool this is close to sufficient, but the definition omits any hint about result scope (open only), ordering, or auth prerequisites that would round it out.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It does name the single parameter and explain it as an optional coin ticker filter, which is adequate meaning for a one-parameter tool, though it gives no format examples or wildcard behavior.

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 ('List your open limit/stop orders') and implicitly scopes to limit/stop order types, which distinguishes it from the market-order sibling get_my_open_market_orders. It does not explicitly name any sibling, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance. With siblings like get_open_orders, get_my_open_market_orders, get_readonly_market_open_orders, and get_my_order_history, the agent gets no signal about which to prefer or when this one applies.

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