binance_spot_cancel_all_orders

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses irreversibility, the specific order states affected, unfreezing of funds, and per-order success/failure outcomes. The danger warning and output example make side effects explicit.

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 well-structured with clear sections (function, danger, use cases, output example) and front-loaded purpose. It is long, but the detail is justified for a dangerous irreversible operation. The output example is extensive but could be slightly condensed without loss.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description provides a comprehensive output example covering success/failure counts, order IDs, released funds, and suggestions. It also covers prerequisites, effects, and alternative verification. This makes the tool's behavior fully understandable.

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 for the only parameter (symbol) is 100%, including format, case-sensitivity, and warnings. The main description adds little beyond the schema itself (only an example in the output section). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 it cancels all open orders for a specified trading pair in one click, specifying order states (NEW, PARTIALLY_FILLED). It distinguishes from sibling tools like single-order cancel (binance_spot_cancel_order) and futures cancel-all (binance_futures_cancel_all_orders).

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?

Provides explicit applicable scenarios (e.g., market volatility, strategy failure) and warns against misuse. It recommends checking open orders first with binance_spot_open_orders, directly guiding when to use vs. alternatives.

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