list_orders

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey a read-only intent and the active-vs-history behavior, but it does not mention account scope, pagination, ordering, or return shape. For a simple listing tool this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and places the default-mode clarification in a parenthetical, making it 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?

For a simple one-optional-parameter list tool, the description plus schema is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. The lack of an output schema and annotations leaves some ambiguity around the exact return shape, but the tool is straightforward enough that the description is nearly complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning beyond the schema by stating the default behavior ('active by default') and how the history flag changes the result set, which clarifies the parameter's role without needing to inspect the schema.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('trading orders'), and immediately clarifies the default mode (active) versus optional history. This clearly distinguishes it from order-mutating siblings like place_order/cancel_order/modify_order and from list_positions/data_get_trades.

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 when to use the tool through 'List trading orders' and the active/history distinction, but it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling alternatives to prefer. Context is implied rather than spelled out.

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