okx_get_algo_orders

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior. It only indicates a read operation via '[L:READ]' but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, output format, or side effects. No contradictions since annotations are absent.

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 a cryptic format that is not self-explanatory. It is under-specified, lacking clarity in favor of brevity.

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?

No output schema is present, so the description should hint at return values or behavior. It only provides a prerequisite (call agent_catalog) without explaining what the tool returns or how it fits into the broader workflow. Inadequate for a 2-param tool.

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%, so the schema already describes both parameters (ordType, instType) with enums and Chinese descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Given high coverage, baseline is 3, but the description could have added value.

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:READ]' and 'CAT:[交易-委托]' but does not explicitly state that the tool retrieves algo orders. It fails to distinguish from sibling tools such as 'okx_get_orders_algo_pending' or 'okx_get_algo_orders_history', making the purpose vague.

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 only instructs to call 'agent_catalog' first, but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'okx_place_algo_order' or 'okx_get_algo_orders_history'. No exclusions or context are provided.

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