create_live_command

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

Annotations only provide a title, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Send a command' implies a write operation, it doesn't specify required permissions, potential side effects (e.g., executing trades), rate limits, or what constitutes a valid 'live trading algorithm'. No output behavior is described despite having an output schema.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool that sends commands to live trading algorithms (potentially high-impact), the description is insufficient. With 0% schema coverage, no behavioral context, and no usage guidelines, it leaves critical gaps despite having an output schema. The description doesn't address what makes a command valid or the implications of execution.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but provides no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'model' contains, the required 'projectId' and 'command' fields, or the command structure shown in examples. The single-sentence description adds no meaning beyond the bare 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 clearly states the action ('Send a command') and target ('to a live trading algorithm'), providing specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'broadcast_live_command' or 'liquidate_live_algorithm', which appear related to live trading operations.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'broadcast_live_command' or other live algorithm management tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites, appropriate scenarios, or exclusions.

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