futures_cancel_all_open_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states that the operation is irreversible and includes conditional orders, which is critical. It does not mention rate limits or other side effects, but the key behavioral trait is well disclosed.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action and then the necessary condition. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 cancellation tool with two simple parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, the scope (all open/conditional orders), irreversibility, and the required parameter. No missing information for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, and both parameters already have good descriptions in the schema. The description reinforces the purpose of the confirm parameter as a safety measure but does not add significant new meaning beyond 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 clearly states the action (cancel all open orders including conditional orders) and the resource (specified symbol). It distinguishes itself from siblings like futures_cancel_order (single order) and futures_cancel_batch_orders (batch but not all).

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?

Implied usage is clear: use when you want to clear all orders for a symbol. The description mentions irreversibility and the need for confirmation, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools.

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