get_order

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

The description includes '[REQUIRES AUTH]', which is a useful behavioral trait indicating authentication is needed. However, no other traits like error handling, data freshness, or non-destructive nature are disclosed. Without annotations, more details would be beneficial.

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 a tag. Every word earns its place; no redundancy. Could benefit from structure but remains concise.

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 read tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. Missing details like return format, error behavior, or what 'order details' includes.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both 'order_id' and 'pair'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 'Get order details by order ID', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'open_orders' (list open orders) and 'order_history' (historical list), though it could be more explicit about scope.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'open_orders' or 'order_history'. The description does not provide context for decision-making or mention prerequisites.

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