okx_cancel_spread_order

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

The description contains '[L:WRITE]' indicating a write operation, but this is already implied by the tool name 'cancel'. No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or idempotency. It fails to do so, leaving behavioral transparency poor.

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 short but uses non-standard, cryptic notation. It is concise but not clearly structured for an AI agent to parse. The instruction to call agent_catalog is front-loaded but lacks proper formatting.

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 write operation with no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the result of a successful cancellation, error conditions, or any preconditions beyond calling agent_catalog. The agent lacks information needed to handle the tool correctly.

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 is 100%, and the schema provides Chinese descriptions for both parameters (ordId and sprdId). The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already conveys, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 cryptic notation '[L:WRITE] CAT:[策略-价差]' rather than plain language. The tool name 'cancel_spread_order' clearly indicates its function, but the description adds little clarity. It references a category and prerequisite without explicitly stating that it cancels a spread order.

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' (please call agent_catalog first). This provides some guidance but no explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other order operations) or when not to use it.

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