okx_get_recurring_orders_history

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states a read operation via '[L:READ]' but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the response contains. No output schema exists to compensate.

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 brief—two tags and a prerequisite note. It is concise and front-loaded but somewhat under-informative. It earns a high score for efficiency, though more substance would improve it.

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 lack of output schema and the tool's specific purpose (recurring orders history), the description fails to explain what recurring orders are, what data the tool returns, or how to interpret the results. It relies heavily on the prerequisite call to 'agent_catalog' and is thus incomplete.

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 zero parameters, so parameter documentation is unnecessary. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable.

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 '[L:READ]' and 'CAT:[策略-网格]' indicating a read operation on grid strategies, but does not explicitly state that the tool retrieves history of recurring orders. The purpose is vague and does not distinguish it from sibling recurring order tools like 'okx_get_recurring_orders_pending'.

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 such as 'okx_get_recurring_orders_pending' or 'okx_get_recurring_sub_orders'.

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