List one bot's orders

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the required `bots:read` scope, a concrete rate limit (600/min shared across the group, ~10/sec), that results are read from stored records rather than hitting a venue, and two edge-case behaviors (stopped bots still readable, unknown bot returns empty list not an error). Rich, actionable behavioral context beyond readOnlyHint/idempotentHint.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and its ordering. Each sentence carries distinct information (scope, edge cases, auth, rate limit) with no filler.

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?

Covers scope, auth, limits, and edge cases for an 8-param read tool with no output schema. The only gap is the return/pagination shape (page size default, the nextBefore cursor flow), which the agent must infer from the schema's `before` and `limit` parameters.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: results are 'newest first' (sort order is undocumented in the schema) and the default set is open plus historic, clarifying that status filtering is optional rather than implicit.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope and ordering: 'Every order that bot has placed, open and historic, newest first.' An agent knows this is a per-bot order listing, though the description never explicitly contrasts it with the sibling list_orders/list_open_orders, leaving that differentiation to the tool name.

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?

Gives clear context for when it applies (works for stopped bots; unknown bot yields an empty list rather than an error), which removes a real decision risk. It stops short of naming alternatives like list_orders or list_open_orders and saying when to prefer them.

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