create_market_order

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

With no annotations, the description adds valuable behavioral context: collateral lock (~0.957 ALGO) and return fields (escrowAppId, matched quantity, fill price). However, it omits fee behavior, partial fill handling, and error conditions.

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?

Three concise sentences with the purpose front-loaded. No redundant information—every sentence provides unique value (purpose, units/behavior, return values).

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?

The description covers return values (escrowAppId, matched quantity, fill price) in the absence of an output schema, and mentions collateral lock. However, it lacks details on what escrowAppId is used for, potential partial fills, or what happens if no counterparty exists.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, but the description adds concrete unit examples (e.g., 500000 = $0.50) that clarify the microunit format, going beyond the schema's minimal 'Price in microunits'.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: place a market order with auto-matching. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'create_limit_order' by using the verb 'place' and specifying 'market order' with auto-matching.

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 implies immediate execution via 'auto-matching' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'create_limit_order'. No when-not or exclusions are provided.

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