my_market_orders

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

The description begins with 'View', indicating a read-only operation with no side effects. It also notes that filled orders include a delivered_payload, giving insight into the response structure. With no annotations provided, this level of transparency is adequate.

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 succinct, using two sentences to convey the tool's purpose and a key detail about filled orders. There is no fluff or unnecessary information.

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 that there is no output schema, the description provides useful context by mentioning that filled orders include delivered_payload and mentioning specific examples. This helps the agent understand what to expect, though it could be more explicit about the exact structure. Still, it is sufficient.

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 only parameter, api_key, is described as 'Your Crowns API key', which is self-explanatory. The schema already provides this description, so there is no ambiguity.

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 function: viewing the user's own market orders, including created and bought/claimed orders, across all states. It distinguishes itself from browsing the market (which is public) by explicitly saying 'your market orders'.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool: when a user wants to inspect their own market orders. It contrasts with 'browse_market' for public viewing, though it does not explicitly name the alternative or provide conditions. Still, the intent is clear.

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