okx_batch_cancel_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only gives a category and a prerequisite, without specifying effects, idempotency, error handling, or return behavior. The '[L:WRITE]' label implies mutation but is not part of the description text.

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 very concise but sacrifices completeness. The prerequisite is front-loaded, but the overall structure is minimal and does not fully serve the agent's needs.

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 that this is a write tool with a complex input (JSON array for batch cancellation) and no output schema, the description fails to mention return values, error scenarios, or any limitations. It is not sufficiently complete for an agent to use reliably.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'orders', which includes a description of its JSON format. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool name 'okx_batch_cancel_orders' clearly indicates its purpose of canceling multiple orders. The description includes '[L:WRITE]' and 'CAT:[交易]' providing context that it is a write operation related to trading, but it does not explicitly state the action in a full sentence.

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 includes a prerequisite '请先调用 agent_catalog', but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like okx_cancel_order, okx_mass_cancel, or okx_cancel_all_after. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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