okx_place_order

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only hints at a write operation with '[L:WRITE]'. It lacks details on authorization needs, rate limits, or the fact that this tool modifies account state by creating orders. The behavioral burden falls entirely on the description, which is insufficient.

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 (one line), which is concise but at the expense of clarity. The cryptic tags are not self-explanatory, and the important instruction to call agent_catalog is buried. The structure does not effectively communicate the tool's purpose.

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 complex mutation tool like placing an order, the description lacks information about return values, failure modes, side effects, or post-call actions. The absence of an output schema amplifies this gap. Agents are left guessing about what happens after invoking this 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions and enums. The tool description adds zero parameter-level information, but the schema already does a good job. 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:[交易]' but does not explicitly state that the tool places an order. It relies heavily on the tool name 'okx_place_order' for clarity, which is insufficient for agents unfamiliar with the naming convention.

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 instruction to call 'agent_catalog' first, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'okx_place_algo_order' or 'okx_event_place_order'. Agents cannot differentiate based on this description.

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