okx_event_amend_order

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The '[L:WRITE]' tag vaguely implies a write operation, but this is not explicit or informative.

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 extremely short (two tags and a prerequisite instruction), but it lacks substance. It is under-specified rather than concise, as it fails to provide essential information.

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 the tool's complexity (amending an order in event markets) and the absence of an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, constraints, or examples. The tool cannot be used effectively with this description alone.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters (instId, ordId, newPx, newSz) with Chinese descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 description uses cryptic tags like '[L:WRITE]' and 'CAT:[预测]' which hint at a write operation for predictions, but does not explicitly state what the tool does (amending an order). The tool name 'okx_event_amend_order' provides some clarity, but the description itself is insufficient.

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 instructs to call 'agent_catalog' first, which is a prerequisite, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'okx_place_order' or 'okx_cancel_order'. No differentiation from sibling tools.

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