get_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only names filters. It does not explain sort order, how cursor/limit pagination works, what status values are valid, whether results are scoped to the required account_seq, or any other observable behavior.

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 sentence with the action and resource front-loaded. It is compact and readable, though 'spec's' is vague filler and the filter list does not exactly match the schema parameter names.

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?

Given seven parameters, a required account_seq, and a cursor-based pagination field, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the mandatory account_seq, pagination behavior, how dates should be formatted, or how this endpoint relates to get_order. The output schema may cover return values, but the input behavior is underspecified.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add some meaning by identifying status, symbol, from, to, cursor, and limit as filters, but 'from'/'to' do not exactly match from_date/to_date, account_seq is omitted entirely despite being required, and no value formats or status options are given.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('orders'), and lists the filter dimensions, so it is immediately clear this is the plural listing endpoint and can be distinguished from the singular get_order. The phrase 'spec's' is somewhat obscure, but the core purpose is clear enough.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use get_orders versus related siblings like get_order, get_holdings, or get_recent_trades. Use is only implied by the command 'List orders', with no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing.

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