Toss Get Orders

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

No annotations provided. The description only says 'list orders' and mentions filters, but does not disclose read-only nature, authentication needs, pagination behavior, or any side effects. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and filters, then usage guidance. No waste.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks response format, pagination details, error handling, and constraints beyond the schema. The usage guidance helps, but behavioral transparency is lacking.

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 description coverage is only 14%, so the description must compensate. It mentions filters like status, symbol, date range, cursor, and limit, but does not explain their formats or how cursor/limit control pagination. It adds some value but not enough.

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 it lists orders with filters, which is clear. It distinguishes from toss_get_order by specifying it's for order history or open-order lists, not a single order. However, it could be more explicit about the resource being 'orders for an account'.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (order history or open-order lists) and when not (fetching a known single orderId), implying the alternative tool toss_get_order. This is excellent guidance.

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