paper_fill

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states basic functionality without explaining side effects (e.g., impact on balance, irreversibility, dependencies) or the behavior of the 'fetch' and 'price' parameters. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more structured to include parameter relationships.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain return values, prerequisites, or how this tool fits into a broader workflow (e.g., after paper_init, before paper_check_fills). This leaves the agent underinformed.

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 description adds limited value. It clarifies the relationship between 'order_id' and 'all' (alternatives), but does not elaborate on 'price' or 'fetch' beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Fill') and the resource ('open paper order'), and distinguishes two modes (by order_id or all=true). This is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like paper_cancel or paper_buy.

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 the tool is used when you want to fill an open paper order, either by specifying an ID or all orders. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the purpose is clear enough for an AI agent to infer appropriate usage.

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