okx_get_orders_archive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. '[L:READ]' hints at read-only operation but is ambiguous. No disclosure of pagination, rate limits, or behavior like what data is returned. The prerequisite to call agent_catalog is mentioned but not explained.

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 but cryptic, mixing symbols, Chinese, and English tags. It is not well-structured for an AI agent; it lacks clear sentences. Conciseness is positive but under-specification hurts usability.

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 exists, so description should explain return value. It does not. The tool is for archived orders but no mention of date ranges or filtering beyond limit and instType. The prerequisite call to agent_catalog is not explained. Incomplete for a 2-parameter 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% with descriptions for both parameters (instType and limit) in Chinese. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 name 'okx_get_orders_archive' clearly indicates retrieving archived orders. The description adds '[L:READ] CAT:[交易]' which suggests a read operation in trading, but lacks a specific verb. It is not a tautology but the description is not explicit enough to distinguish from siblings like 'okx_get_orders_history'.

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 '→ 请先调用 agent_catalog' indicating a prerequisite to call another tool first, but does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'okx_get_orders_pending', 'okx_get_orders_history'). No differentiation from siblings.

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