Ripio Trade open orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructiveness. The description adds useful behavioral context: optional filtering by pair/side and the amount fields present in the response. It does not contradict the annotations, and pagination is already hinted by the cursor parameter.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the operation and includes only valuable details: resource, optional filters, and output fields. There is no filler or repetition of schema 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?

For a read-only, no-required-parameter list tool with an output schema and documented cursor, the description is nearly complete. The main gap is the lack of explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings, but that is minor for correctly invoking it.

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 schema already documents pair and cursor, and the side enum is self-explanatory. The description adds that filtering by pair or side is optional, which is helpful, but 'one pair or side' is slightly imprecise about whether both filters can be combined. With 67% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but does not fully add meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action ('Open orders on Ripio Trade') and names the optional filters (pair, side) as well as the returned amounts (price, requested, executed, remaining). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_activity, get_prices, or get_transaction.

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 phrase 'optionally for one pair or side' gives some usage context and clarifies that filtering is not mandatory. However, the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over sibling alternatives such as ripio_list_activity or ripio_get_portfolio; the usage is implied rather than stated.

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