Modify order

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

Annotations already signal mutation and destructiveness, so the description adds value by warning about the lack of a max-distance check and clarifying that trailPrice is an absolute price level. This goes beyond what readOnlyHint/destructiveHint provide.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a targeted warning. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 seven parameters, low schema description coverage, no output schema, and a destructive action, the description is too sparse to fully guide correct invocation. It omits important context such as how partial updates work, which fields may conflict, and what errors or side effects to expect.

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 low at 29%, and the description partially compensates by explaining trailPrice and grouping size/price intent. However, stopPrice, limitPrice, orderId, and optional-field semantics remain undocumented in both schema and description, so coverage is incomplete.

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 states a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('size or price of a working order'), with a concrete example ('move a stop to breakeven'). It also distinguishes itself from place_order, which helps disambiguate from the closest sibling.

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 makes clear this tool is for modifying an existing working order and explicitly contrasts it with place_order by calling out the missing max-distance check. It does not enumerate exclusions like canceling or closing orders, but the usage context is clear.

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