Fund Orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the auth requirement; it does not mention the default time window, pagination defaults, or that states/actions are comma-separated filters with 'all' semantics. Useful but thin beyond the structured data.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by the prerequisite and a compact parameter inventory. Nothing is padded, though the parameter list largely duplicates what the schema already shows.

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 9-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, auth, and the parameter surface, so an agent can form a call. It is incomplete on default time window, pagination behaviour, and how this differs from the many similarly named order-listing siblings.

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 every one of the 9 parameters is already documented in the schema, including the jq filter and unit notes for start/end. The description merely re-lists parameter names and adds no format, default, or interaction detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'List the user's fund orders / execution records'. An agent knows it is a read/list operation over fund orders. However, it never distinguishes itself from near-identical siblings such as fund_order, history_orders, or today_orders, so the agent must guess which of these list-like tools covers this scope.

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?

'Requires auth' states a prerequisite, which is genuinely useful. Beyond that there is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to the sibling tools that would return a single order (fund_order) or non-fund order history (history_orders). Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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