okx_stop_grid_order

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden of disclosing behavior. It only labels the tool as a write operation ('[L:WRITE]') but does not describe what happens on stop (e.g., immediate cancellation, confirmation, permissions needed), leaving critical behavioral gaps.

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 concise (one line), but the use of codes like '[L:WRITE]' and 'CAT:[策略-网格]' is cryptic and not well-structured for an AI agent. While short, it sacrifices clarity and could be improved with plain language.

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?

As a write operation with no output schema, the description should at least explain the tool's purpose and effect. It only offers a prerequisite instruction. Information on required parameters or return values is absent, making it incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 description adds no extra meaning to parameters. The description does not explain the purpose of 'algoId', 'instId', or 'algoOrdType' beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score.

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_stop_grid_order' clearly indicates stopping a grid order, but the description uses cryptic prefixes like '[L:WRITE]' and 'CAT:[策略-网格]' without stating the action explicitly. The purpose is vaguely implied rather than clearly stated.

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, providing a prerequisite. However, it does not compare this tool to siblings like 'okx_close_grid_position' or 'okx_create_grid_order', leaving the agent unsure when to use this tool over alternatives.

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