open_orders

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

The description includes '[REQUIRES AUTH]', indicating authentication is needed. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether it returns pending or partially filled orders, or if it affects order state.

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 short sentence, concise and front-loaded with the auth requirement. It is not verbose but could include slightly more context without losing conciseness.

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 the tool is simple (list open orders, one optional param) and no output schema, the description is somewhat complete. It mentions auth but lacks details about return format, order statuses (e.g., pending, partially filled), and pagination if applicable.

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% with one optional string parameter 'pair' described as 'Filter by trading pair (optional)'. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List open orders' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like order_history (historical orders) and get_order (single order). However, it does not specify scope (e.g., for the authenticated user or all users).

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 order_history or paper_orders. The description lacks context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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